|Gi|[irLJffufl|l^lTr^ 


s 

i 
i 
I 
I 
I 
I 

1 


THE  LIBRARIES 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


1 

i 
i 
i 
i 
1 


B 

I 

i 


VIEW 


OP 


THE    STATE    OF    EUROPE 


DURING 


THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 


By  HENRY  HALLAM,  LL.D.,  F.R.A.S., 

FOEEIGN   ASSOCIATE  OF  THE  INSTITUTE  OF  FRANCE. 


IN  TWO  VOLUMES. 
VOLUME  I. 


Weto  fforft: 

A.    C.    ARMSTRONG    AND    SON, 

61  East  10th  Street,  Near  Broadway. 
1893- 


tjt/0,1 


University  Press  :  John    Wilson  &  Son 
Cambridge. 


•      «     •  •    •••      • 

•  •  •  •  «       •  •   • 


PREFACE 
TO   THE    FIRST   EDITION. 


It  is  the  object  of  the  present  work  to  exhibit,  in  a  series 
of  historical  dissertations,  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the 
chief  circumstances  that  can  interest  a  philosophical  inquirer 
during  the  period  usually  denominated  the  Middle  Ages. 
Such  an  undertaking  must  necessarily  fall  under  the  class  of 
historical  abridgments :  yet  there  will  perhaps  be  found 
enough  to  distinguish  it  from  such  as  have  already  appeared. 
Many  considerable  portions  of  time,  especially  before  the 
twelfth  century,  may  justly  be  deemed  so  barren  of  events 
worthy  of  remembrance,  that  a  single  sentence  or  paragraph 
is  often  sufficient  to  give  the  character  of  entire  generations 
and  of  long  dynasties  of  obscure  kings. 

Non  ragioniam  di  lor,  ma  guarda  e  passa. 

And  even  in  the  more  pleasing  and  instructive  parts  of  this 
middle  period  it  has  been  my  object  to  avoid  the  dry  compo- 
sition of  annals,  and  aiming,  with  what  spirit  and  freedom  I 
could,  at  a  just  outline  rather  than  a  miniature,  to  suppress  all 
events  that  did  not  appear  essentially  concatenated  with 
others,  or  illustrative  of  important  conclusions.  But  as  the 
modes  of  government  and  constitutional  laws  which  prevailed 
in  various  countries  of  Europe,  and  especially  in  England, 
seemed  to  have  been  less  fully  dwelt  upon  in  former  workf 
of  this  description  than  military  or  civil  transactions,  while 
they  were  deserving  of  far  more  attention,  I  have  taken  pains 
to  give  a  true  representation  of  them,  and  in  every  instance 
to  point  out  the  sources  from  which  the  reader  may  derive 
more  complete  and  original  information. 

Nothing  can  be  farther  from  my  wishes  than  that  the  fol- 
lowing pages  should  be  judged  according  to  the  critical  laws 
of  historical  composition.  Tried  in  such  a  balance  they 
would  be  eminently  defective.  The  limited  extent  of  this 
work,  compared  with  the  subjects  it  embraces,  as  well  as  it-. 


Vlll  PREFACE  TO   THE   FIRST   EDITION. 

partaking  more  of  the  character  of  political  dissertation  than 
of  narrative,  must  necessarily  preclude  that  circumstantial 
delineation  of  events  and  of  characters  upon  which  the  beauty 
as  well  as  usefulness  of  a  regular  history  so  mainly  depends. 
Nor  can  I  venture  to  assert  that  it  will  be  found  altogether 
perspicuous  to  those  who  are  destitute  of  any  previous  ac- 
quaintance with  the  period  to  which  it  relates ;  though  I  have 
only  presupposed,  strictly  speaking,  a  knowledge  of  the  com- 
mon facts  of  English  history,  and  have  endeavored  to  avoid, 
in  treating  of  other  countries,  those  allusive  references  which 
imply  more  information  in  the  reader  than  the  author  designs 
to  communicate.  But  the  arrangement  which  I  have  adopted 
has  sometimes  rendered  it  necessary  to  anticipate  both  names 
and  facts  which  are  to  find  a  more  definite  plaee  in  a  subse- 
quent part  of  the  work. 

This  arrangement  is  probably  different  from  that  of  any 
former  historical  retrospect.  Every  chapter  of  the  following 
volumes  completes  its  particular  subject,  and  may  be  con- 
sidered in  some  degree  as  independent  of  the  rest.  The 
order  consequently  in  which  they  are  read  will  not  be  very 
material,  though  of  course  I  should  rather  prefer  that  in  which 
they  are  at  present  disposed.  A  solicitude  to  avoid  continual 
transitions,  and  to  give  free  scope  to  the  natural  association 
of  connected  facts,  has  dictated  this  arrangement,  to  which  1 
confess  myself  partial.  And  I  have  found  its  inconveniences 
so  trifling  in  composition,  that  I  cannot  believe  they  will  oc- 
casion much  trouble  to  the  reader. 

The  first  chapter  comprises  the  history  of  France  from  the 
invasion  of  Clovis  to  the  expedition,  exclusively,  of  Charles 
VIII.  against  Naples.  It  is  not  possible  to  fix  accurate 
limits  to  the  Middle  Ages ;  but  though  the  ten  centuries  from 
the  fifth  to  the  fifteenth  seem,  in  a  general  point  of  view,  to 
constitute  that  period,  a  less  arbitrary  division  was  necessary 
to  render  the  commencement  and  conclusion  of  an  historical 
narrative  satisfactory.  The  continuous  ehain  of  transaetions 
on  the  stage  of  human  society  is  ill  divided  by  mere  lines  of 
chronological  demarcation.  But  as  the  subversion  of  the 
western  empire  is  manifestly  the  natural  termination  of 
ancient  history,  so  the  establishment  of  the  Franks  in  Gaul 
appears  the  most  convenient  epoch  for  the  commencement  of 
a  new  period.  Less  difficulty  oecurred  in  finding  the  other 
limit     The  invasion  of  Naples  by  Charles  VIII.  was  the 


PREFACE  TO   THE  FIRST   EDITION.  1X 

event  that  first  engaged  the  principal  states  of  Europe  in  re- 
lations of  alliance  or  hostility  which  may  be  deduced  to  the 
present  day,  and  is  the  point  at  which  every  man  who  traces 
backwards  its  political  history  will  be  obliged  to  pause.  It 
furnishes  a  determinate  epoch  in  the  annals  of  Italy  and 
France,  and  nearly  coincides  with  events  which  naturally 
terminate  the  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  other  countries. 

The  feudal  system  is  treated  in  the  second  chapter,  which 
I  have  subjoined  to  the  history  of  France,  with  which  it  has 
a  near  connection.  Inquiries  into  the  antiquities  of  that  juris- 
prudence occupied  more  attention  in  the  last  age  than  the 
present,  and  their  dryness  may  prove  repulsive  to  many 
readers.  But  there  is  no  royal  road  to  the  knowledge 
law  ;  nor  can  any  man  render  an  obscure  and  intricate  disquisi- 
tion either  perspicuous  or  entertaining.  That  the  feudal  sys- 
tem is  an  important  branch  of  historical  knowledge  will  not 
be  disputed,  when  we  consider  not  only  its  influence  upon  our 
own  constitution,  but  that  one  of  the  parties  which  at  present 
divide  a  neighboring  kingdom  professes  to  appeal  to  the  origi- 
nal principles  of  its  monarchy,  as  they  subsisted  before  the 
subversion  of  that  polity. 

The  four  succeeding  chapters  contain  a  sketch,  more  or 
less  rapid  and  general,  of  the  histories  of  Italy,  of  Spain,  of 
Germany,  and  of  the  Greek  and  Saracenic  empires.  In  the 
seventh  I  have  endeavored  to  develop  the  progress  of  ecclesi- 
astical power,  a  subject  eminently  distinguishing  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  of  which  a  concise  and  impartial  delineation  has 
long  been  desirable. 

The  English  constitution  furnishes  materials  Jbr  the  eighth 
chapter.  I  cannot  hope  to  have  done  sufficient  justice  id  this 
theme,  which  has  cost  me  considerable  labor;  but  it  is  worthy 
of  remark,  that  since  the  treatise  of  Nathaniel  Bacon,  itself 
open  to  much  exception,  there  has  been  no  historical  develop- 
ment of  our  constitution,  founded  upon  extensive  researches, 
or  calculated  to  give  a  just  notion  of  its  character.  For  those 
parts  of  Henry's  history  which  profess  to  trace  the  progress 
of  government  are  still  more  jejune  than  the  rest  of  his 
volumes;  and  the  work  of  Professor  Millar,  of  Glasgow. 
however  pleasing  from  its  liberal  spirit,  displays  a  fault  too 
common  among  the  philosophers  of  his  country,  that  of  theo- 
rizing upon  an  imperfect  induction,  and  very  often  upon  a  total 
misapprehension  of  particular  facts 


X  PREFACE  TO  THE  FIRST  EDITION. 

The  ninth  and  last  chapter  relates  to  the  general  state  of 
society  in  Europe  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  comprehends 
the  history  of  commerce,  of  manners,  and  of  literature. 
None,  however,  of  these  are  treated  in  detail,  and  the  whole 
chapter  is  chiefly  designed  as  supplemental  to  the  rest,  in 
order  to  vary  the  relations  under  which  events  may  be 
viewed,  and  to  give  a  more  adequate  sense  of  the  spirit  and 
character  of  the  Middle  A^es. 

In  the  execution  of  a  plan  far  more  comprehensive  than 
what  with  a  due  consideration  either  of  my  abilities  or  oppor- 
tunities I  ought  to  have  undertaken,  it  would  be  strangely 
presumptuous  to  hope  that  I  can  have  rendered  myself  in- 
vulnerable to  criticism.  Even  if  flagrant  errors  should  not 
be  frequently  detected,  yet  I  am  aware  that  a  desire  of  con- 
ciseness has  prevented  the  sense  of  some  passages  from  ap- 
pearing sufficiently  distinct ;  and  though  I  cannot  hold  myself 
generally  responsible  for  omissions,  in  a  work  which  could 
only  be  brought  within  a  reasonable  compass  by  the  severe 
retrenchment  of  superfluous  matter,  it  is  highly  probable  that 
defective  information,  forgetfulness,  or  too  great  a  regard  for 
brevity,  have  caused  me  to  pass  over  many  things  which 
would  have  materially  illustrated  the  various  subjects  of  these 
inquiries. 

I  dare  not,  therefore,  appeal  with  confidence  to  the  tri- 
bunal of  those  superior  judges  who,  having  bestowed  a  more 
undivided  attention  on  the  particular  objects  that  have 
interested  them,  may  justly  deem  such  general  sketches  im- 
perfect and  superficial ;  but  my  labors  will  not  have  proved 
fruitless  if  they  shall  conduce  to  stimulate  the  reflection,  to 
guide  the  researches,  to  correct  the  prejudices,  or  to  animate 
the  liberal  and  virtuous  sentiments  of  inquisitive  youth : 

Mi  satis  ampla 
Merces,  et  mihi  grande  decus,  nim  ignotus  in  aevum 
Turn  licet,  externo  penitusque  ;ngloriu9  orbi. 

Ajrril.  1818. 


PKEFACE 
TO  A  VOLUME  PUBLISHED  IN  1848, 

ENTITLED 

SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES 

TO   THE 

VIEW  OF  THE  STATE  OF  EUROPE  DURING 
THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 


Thirty  years  have  elapsed  since  the  publication  of  the 
work  to  which  the  following  notes  relate,  and  almost  forty 
since  the  first  chapter  and  part  of  the  second  were  writ  ten.  The 
occupations  of  that  time  rendered  it  impossible  for  me  to  bestow 
such  undivided  attention  as  so  laborious  and  difficult  an  un- 
dertaking demanded ;  and  at  the  outset  I  had  very  little  inten- 
tion of  prosecuting  my  researches,  even  to  that  degree  of 
exactness  which  a  growing  interest  in  the  ascertainment  of 
precise  truth,  and  a  sense  of  its  difficulty,  led  me  afterwards 
in  some  parts  to  seek,  though  nowhere  equal  to  what  with  \ 
fuller  command  of  time  I  should  have  desired  to  attain.  A 
measure  of  public  approbation  accorded  to  me  far  lx-vmidmy 
hopes  has  not  blinded  my  discernment  to  the  deficiencies  of 
my  own  performance ;  and  as  successive  editions  have  been 
called  for,  I  have  continually  felt  that  there  was  more  to  cor- 
rect or  to  elucidate  than  the  insertion  of  a  few  foot-notes 
would  supply,  while  I  was  always  reluctant  to  make  such  al- 
terations as  would  leave  to  the  purchasers  of  former  editions 
a  right  to  complain.  From  an  author  whose  science  is  con- 
tinually progressive,  such  as  chemistry  or  geology,  this  is  un- 
avoidably expected  ;  but  I  thought  the  case  not  quite  the  same 
with  a  mediaeval  historian. 

In  tfie  mean   time,  however,  the  long  period  of  the  Middle 


Xll  PREFACE  TO   SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

Ages  had  been  investigated  by  many  of  my  distinguished  con- 
temporaries  with  signal  success,  and  I  have  been  anxious  to 
bring  my  own  volumes  nearer  to  the  boundaries  of  the  historic 
domain,  as  it  has  been  enlarged  within  our  own  age.  My  ob- 
ject has  been,  accordingly,  to  reconsider  those  portions  of  the 
work  which  relate  to  subjects  discussed  by  eminent  writers 
since  its  publication,  to  illustrate  and  enlarge  some  passages 
which  had  been  imperfectly  or  obscurely  treated,  and  to  ac- 
knowledge with  freedom  my  own  errors.  It  appeared  most 
convenient  to  adopt  a  form  of  publication  by  which  the  pos- 
sessors of  any  edition  may  have  the  advantage  of  these  Sup- 
plemental Notes,  which  will  not  much  affect  the  value  of 
their  copy. 

The  first  two  Chapters,  on  the  History  of  France  and  on 
the  Feudal  System,  have  been  found  to  require  a  good  deal 
of  improvement.  As  a  history,  indeed,  of  the  briefest  kind, 
the  first  pages  are  insufficient  for  those  who  have  little  pre- 
vious knowledge ;  and  this  I  have,  of  course,  not  been  able 
well  to  cure.  The  second  Chapter  embraces  subjects  which 
have  peculiarly  drawn  the  attention  of  Continental  writers  for 
the  last  thirty  years.  The  whole  history  of  France,  civil, 
constitutional,  and  social,  has  been  more  philosophically  exam- 
ined, and  yet  with  a  more  copious  erudition,  by  which  philoso- 
phy must  always  be  guided,  than  in  any  former  age.  Two 
writers  of  high  name  have  given  the  world  a  regular  history 
of  that  country  —  one  for  modern  as  well  as  mediaeval  times, 
the  other  for  these  alone.  The  great  historian  of  the  Italian 
republics,  my  guide  and  companion  in  that  portion  of  the 
History  of  the  Middle  Ages,  published  in  1821  the  first  vol- 
umes of  his  History  of  the  French ;  it  is  well  known  that  this 
labor  of  twenty  years  was  very  nearly  terminated  when  he 
was  removed  from  the  world.  The  two  histories  of  Sismondi 
will,  in  all  likelihood,  never  be  superseded  ;  if  in  the  latter 
we  sometimes  miss,  and  yet  we  do  not  always  miss,  the  glow- 
ing and  vivid  pencil,  guided  by  the  ardor  of  youth  and  the 
distinct  remembrance  of  scenery,  we  find  no  inferiority  in 
justness  of  thought,  in  copiousness  of  narration,  and  espe- 
cially in  love  of  virtue  and  indignation  at  wrong.  It  seems, 
indeed,  as  if  the  progress  of  years  had  heightened  the  stern 
sentiments  of  republicanism  with  which  he  set  out,  and  to 
which  the  whole  course  of  his  later  work  must  have  afforded 
no  gratification,  except  that  of  scorn  and  severity.     Measur- 


PREFACE  TO   SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES.  xm 

ing  not  only  their  actions  but  characters  by  a  rigid  standard, 
he  sometimes  demands  from  the  men  of  past  times  more  than 
human  frailty  and  ignorance  could  have  given ;  and  his  histo- 
ry would  leave  but  a  painful  impression  from  the  gloominess 
of  the  picture,  were  not  this  constantly  relieved  by  the  pecul- 
iar softness  and  easy  grace  of  his  style.  It  cannot  be  said 
that  Sismondi  is  very  diligent  in  probing  obscurities,  or  in 
weighing  evidence  ;  his  general  views,  with  which  most  of  his 
chapters  begin,  are  luminous  and  valuable  to  the  ordinary 
reader,  but  sometimes  sketched  too  loosely  for  the  critical  in- 
vestigator of  history. 

Less  full  than  Sismondi  in  the  general  details,  but  seizing 
particular  events  or  epochs  with  greater  minuteness  and  ac- 
curacy —  not  emulating  his  full  and  flowing  periods,  but  in  a 
style  concise,  rapid,  and  emphatic,  sparkling  with  new  and 
brilliant  analogies  —  picturesque  in  description,  spirited  in 
sentiment,. a  poet  in  all  but  his  fidelity  to  truth  —  M.  Michelet 
has  placed  his  own  History  of  France  by  the  side  of  that  of 
Sismondi.  His  quotations  are  more  numerous,  for  Sismondi 
commonly  gives  only  references,  and  when  interwoven  with 
the  text,  as  they  often  are,  though  not  quite  according  to  the 
strict  laws  of  composition,  not  only  bear  with  them  the  proof 
which  an  historical  assertion  may  fail  to  command,  but  exhibit 
a  more  vivid  picture. 

In  praising  M.  Michelet  we  are  not  to  forget  his  defects. 
His  pencil,  always  spirited,  does  not  always  fill  the  canvas. 
The  consecutive  history  of  France  will  not  be  so  well  learned 
from  his  pages  as  from  those  of  Sismondi ;  and  we  should 
protest  against  his  peculiar  bitterness  towards  England,  were 
it  not  ridiculous  in  itself  by  its  frequency  and  exaggeration. 

I  turn  with  more  respect  to  a  great  name  in  historical  lit- 
erature, and  which  is  only  less  great  in  that  sense  than  it 
might  have  been,  because  it  belongs  also  to  the  groundwork 
of  all  future  history  —  the  whole  series  of  events  which  have 
been  developed  on  the  scene  of  Europe  for  twenty  years  now 
past.  No  envy  of  faction,  no  caprice  of  fortune,  can  tear 
from  M.  Guizot  the  trophy  which  time  has  bestowed,  that  he 
for  nearly  eight  years,  past  and  irrevocable,  held  in  his  firm 
grasp  a  power  so  fleeting  before,  and  fell  only  with  the  mon- 
archy which  he  had  sustained,  in  the  convulsive  throes  of  hi? 
country. 


xiv  PREFACE  TO   SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES. 

"  Cras  vel  atra 
Nube  polum  Pater  occupato, 
Vel  sole  puro :  non  tamen  irritum, 
Quodcunque  retro  est,  efficiet." 

It  has  remained  for  my  distinguished  friend  to  manifest  that 
high  attribute  of  a  great  man's  mind  —  a  constant  and  unsub- 
dued spirit  in  adversity,  and  to  turn  once  more  to  those  tran- 
quil pursuits  of  earlier  days  which  bestow  a  more  unmingled 
enjoyment  and  a  more  (menvied  glory  than  the  favor  of  kings 
or  the  applause  of  senates. 

The  Essais  sur  PHistoire  de  France,  by  M.  Guizot,  ap- 
peared in  1820;  the  Collection  de  Memoires  relatives  a 
l'Histoire  de  France  (a  translation  generally  from  the  Latin, 
under  his  superintendence  and  with  notes  by  him),  if  I  mis- 
take not,  in  1825  ;  the  Lectures  on  the  civilization  of  Europe, 
and  on  that  of  France,  are  of  different  dates,  some  of  the 
latter  in  1829.  These  form,  by  the  confession  of  all,  a 
sort  of  epoch  in  mediaeval  history  by  their  philosophical 
acuteness,  the  judicious  choice  of  their  subjects,  and  the  gen- 
eral solidity  and  truth  of  the  views  which  they  present. 

I  am  almost  unwilling  to  mention  several  other  eminent 
names,  lest  it  should  seem  invidious  to  omit  any.  It  will  suf- 
ficiently appear  by  these  Notes  to  whom  I  have  been  most  in- 
debted. Yet  the  writings  of  Thierry,  Fauriel,  Raynouard, 
and  not  less  valuable,  though  in  time,  almost  the  latest, 
Lehuerou,  ought  not  to  be  passed  in  silence.  1  shall  not 
attempt  to  characterize  these  eminent  men  ;  but  the  gratitude 
of  every  inquirer  into  the  mediaeval  history  of  France  is  es- 
pecially due  to  the  Ministry  of  Public  Instruction  under  the 
late  government  for  the  numerous  volumes  of  Documens  In- 
6dits,  illustrating  that  history,  which  have  appeared  under  its 
superintendence,  and  at  the  public  expense,  within  the  last 
twelve  years.  It  is  difficult  not  to  feel,  at  the  present  junc- 
ture, the  greatest  apprehension  that  this  valuable  publication 
will  at  least  be  suspended. 

Several  Chapters  which  follow  the  second  in  my  volumes 
have  furnished  no  great  store  of  additions ;  but  that  which  re- 
lates to  the  English  Constitution  has  appeared  to  require 
more  illustration.  Many  subjects  of  no  trifling  importance 
in  the  history  of  our  ancient  institutions  had  drawn  the  atten- 
tion of  men  very  conversant  with  its  best  source- ;  and  it  was 
naturally  my  desire  to  impart  in  jome  measure  the  substance 


PREFACE  TO  SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES.  XV 

of  their  researches  to  my  readers.  In  not  many  instances 
have  I  seen  ground  for  materially  altering  my  own  views ; 
and  I  have  not  of  course  hesitated  to  differ  from  those  whom 
I  often  quote  with  much  respect.  The  pubh.  ations  of  the  Re- 
cord Commission  —  the  celebrated  Report  of  the  Lords'  Com- 
mittee on  the  Dignity  of  a  Peer  —  the  work  of  my  learned 
and  gifted  friend  Sir  Francis  Palgrave,  On  the  Rise  and 
Progress  of  the  English  Commonwealth,  replete  with  omnifa- 
rious reading  and  fearless  spirit,  though  not  always  command- 
ing the  assent  of  more  sceptical  tempers  —  the  approved  and 
valuable  contributions  to  constitutional  learning  by  Allen, 
Kemble,  Spence,  Starkie,  Nicolas,  Wright,  and  many  others 
—  are  full  of  important  facts  and  enlightened  theories.  Yet  I 
fear  that  I  shall  be  found  to  have  overlooked  much,  especially 
in  that  periodical  literature  which  is  too  apt  to  escape  our  ob- 
servation or  our  memory ;  and  can  only  hope  that  these  Notes, 
imperfect  as  they  must  be,  will  serve  to  extend  the  knowledge 
of  my  readers  and  guide  them  to  the  sources  of  historic 
truth.  They  claim  only  to  be  supplemental,  and  can  be  of 
no  service  to  those  who  do  not  already  possess  the  History  of 
the  Middle  Ages. 

The  paging  of  the  editions  of  1826  and  1841,  one  in  three 
volumes,  the  other  in  two,  has  been  marked  for  each  Note, 
which  will  prevent  I  hope,  all  inconvenience  in  reference. 

June,  1848. 


ADVERTISEMENT  TO  THE  PRESENT  EDITIOJS. 

The  Supplemental  Notes  have  been  incorporated  with  the 
original  work,  partly  at  the  foot  of  the  pages,  partly  at  th« 
close  of  each  chapter. 


CONTENTS 


ow 


THE    FIRST   VOLUME. 


CHAPTER  I. 


TH«   HISTORY   OF   FRANCE   FROM    ITS   CONQUEST   BY   CLOVI8   TO  XHK 
INVASION  OF   NAPLES   BY   CHARLES   VIII. 

Part  I. 

Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  —  Invasion  of  Clovis  —  First  Race  of  French 
Kings  —  Accession  of  Pepin  —  State  of  Italy  —  Charlemagne  —  His  Reign 
and  Character  —  Louis  the  Debonair  —  His  Successors  —  Calamitous 
State  of  the  Empire  in  the  Ninth  and  Tenth  Centuries  —  Accession  of 
Hugh  Capet  —  His  first  Successors  —  Louis  VII.  —  Philip  Augustus  — 
Conquest  of  Normandy  —  War  in  Languedoc  —  Louis  EX.  —  His  Charac- 
ter —  Digression  upon  the  Crusades  —  Philip  III.  —  Philip  IV.  —  Ag- 
grandizement of  French  Monarchy  under  his  Reign  —  Reigns  of  his  Chil- 
dren —  Question  of  Salic  Law  —  Claim  of  Edward  III Page  15 

Part  n. 

War  of  Edward  III.  in  France  —  Causes  of  his  Success  —  Civil  Disturb- 
ances of  France  —  Peace  of  Bretigni  —  Its  Interpretation  considered  — 
Charles  V.  —  Renewal  of  the  War  —  Charles  VI.  —  His  Minority  and 
Insanity  —  Civil  Dissensions  of  the  Parties  of  Orleans  and  Burgundy  — 
Assassination  of  both  these  Princes  —  Intrigues  of  their  Parties  with 
England  under  Henry  IV.  —  Henry  V.  invades  France  —  Treaty  of 
Troyes  —  State  of  France  in  the  first  Years  of  Charles  VII.  —  Progress 
and  subsequent  Decline  of  the  English  Arms  —  their  Expulsion  from 
France — Change  in  the  Political  Constitution  —  Louis  XI.  —  His  Char- 
acter —  Leagues  formed  against  him  —  Charles  Duke  of  Burgundy  —  His 
Prosperity  and  Fall  —  Louis  obtains  Possession  of  Burgundy  —  His  Death 
—  Charles  VIII.  —  Acquisition  of  Britany 61 

Notes  to  Chapter  1 109 

VOL.  I.  — M.  b 


x\i'ii  CONTENTS   OF   THE   FIRST    VOLUME. 

CHAPTER  II. 
of  thk  feudal  8y8tkm,  especially  in  francb. 

Part  1. 

State  of  ancient  Germany  —  Effects  of  the  Conquest  of  Gaul  by  the  Frank* 

—  Tenures  of  Land  —  Distinction  of  Laws  —  Constitution  of  the  ancient 
Frank  Monarchy  —  Gradual  Establishment  of  Feudal  Tenures  —  Prin- 
ciples  of  a  Feudal  Relation  —  Ceremonies  of  Homage  and  Investiture  — 
Military  Service— Feudal  Incidents  of  Relief,  Aid,  Wardship,  &c. — 
Different  Species  of  Fiefs  —  Feudal  Law-books Page  148 

Part  II. 

Analysis  of  the  Feudal  System — Its  local  Extent — View  of  the  different 
Orders  of  Society  during  the  Feudal  Ages  —  NobQity  —  Their  Hanks 
and  Privileges  —  Clergy  —  Freemen  —  Serfs  Or  Villeins  —  Comparative 
State  of  France  and  Germany  —  Privileges  enjoyed  by  the  French  Vas- 
sal-—  Light  of  coining  Money  —  and  of  Private  War  —  Immunity  from 
Taxation  —  Historical  View  of  the  Royal  Revenue  in  France  —  Methods 
adopted  to  augment  it  by  Depreciation  of  the  Coin,  &c.  —  Legislative 
Power  —  Its  State  under  the  Merovingian  Kings,  and  Charlemagne  —  His 
Councils  —  Suspension  of  any  general  Legislative  Authority  during  the 
Prevalence  of  Feudal  Principles  —  The  King's  Council  —  Means  adopted 
to  supply  the  Want  of  a  National  Assembly  — Gradual  Progress  of  the 
King's  Legislative  Power — Philip  VI.  assembles  the  States-General  — 
Their  Powers  limited  to  Taxation  —  States  under  the  Sons  of  Philip  IV. 

—  States  of  1355  and  1356  —  They  nearly  effect  an  entire  Revolution  — 
The  Crown  recovers  its  Vigor — States  of  1380,  under  Charles  VI. — 
Subsequent  Assemblies  under  Charles  VI.  and  Charles  VII.  —  The  Crown 
becomes  more  and  more  absolute — Louis  XL  —  States  of  Tours  in  1484 

—  Historical  View  of  Jurisdiction  in  France  —  Its  earliest  Stage  under 
the  first  Race  of  Kings,  and  Charlemagne  —  Territorial  Jurisdiction  — 
Feudal  Courts  of  Justice  —  Trial  by  Combat  —  Code  of  St.  Louis  —  The 
Territorial  Jurisdictions  give  way  —  Progress  of  the  Judicial  Power  of 
the  Crown  —  Parliament  of  Paris—  Peers  of  France  —  Increased  Author- 
ity of  the  Parliament  —  Registration  of  Edicts  —  Causes  of  the  Decline 
of  the  Feudal  System  —  Acquisitions  of  Domain  by  the  Crown  —  Char- 
ters of  Incorporation  granted  to  Towns  —  Their  previous  Condition  — 
First  Charters  in  the  Twelfth  Century  —  Privileges  contained  in  them  — 
Military  Service  of  Feudal  Tenants  commuted  for  Money  —  Hired  Troops 

—  Change  in  the  Military  System  of  Europe  —  General  View  of  the  Ad- 
vantages and  Disadvantage!  attending  the  Feudal  System 185 

Notes  T(»  Chatter  11 2«* 


CONTENTS   OF  THE  FIRST  VOLUME,  xix 


CHAPTER  III. 

TH*   HISTORY  OF    ITALY,  FROM   THE   EXTINCTION   OF  THE  CARLOVINGIAH 
EMPERORS   TO  THE   INVASION   OF   NAPLES    BY   CHARLES   VIII. 

Part  I. 

State  of  Italy  after  the  Death  of  Charles  the  Fat  —  Coronation  of  Oth o  the 
Great—  State  of  Rome  —  Conrad  II.  —  Union  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy 
with  the  Empire  —  Establishment  of  the  Normans  in  Naples  and  Sicily 

—  Roger  Guiscard  —  Rise  of  the  Lombard  Cities  —  They  gradually  be- 
come more  independent  of  the  Empire  —  Their  internal  Wars  —  Frederic 
Barbarossa  —  Destruction  of  Milan  —  Lombard  League  —  Battle  of  Leg- 
nano  —  Peace  of  Constance  —  Temporal  Principality  of  the  Popes  — 
Guelf  and  Ghibelin  Factions  —  Otho  IV.  —  Frederic  II.  —  Arrangement 
of  the  Italian  Republics  —  Second  Lombard  War  —  Extinction  of  the 
House  of  Suabia  —  Causes  of  the  Success  of  Lombard  Republics  —  Their 
Prosperity  —  and  Forms  of  Government — Contentions  between  the  No- 
bilitv  and  People — Civil  Wars — Story  of  Giovanni  di  Vicenza.  Page  313 

Part  II. 

State  of  Italy  after  the  Extinction  of  the  House  of  Suabia  —  Conquest  of 
Naples  by  Charles  of  Anjou  —  The  Lombard  Republics  become  severally 
subject  to  Princes  or  Usurpers  —  The  Visconti  of  Milan  —  Their  Aggran- 
dizement—  Decline  of  the  Imperial  Authority  over  Italy  —  Internal  State 
of  Rome  —  Rienzi  —  Florence  —  her  Forms  of  Government  historically 
traced  to  the  end  of  the  Fourteenth  Century  —  Conquest  of  Pisa  —  Pisa 

—  Its  Commerce,  Naval  Wars  with  Genoa,  and  Decay — Genoa  —  her 
Contentions  with  Venice  —  War  of  Chioggia  —  Government  of  Genoa  — 
Venice  —  her  Origin  and  Prosperity  —  Venetian  Government  —  its  Vices 

—  Territorial  Conquests  of  Venice  —  Military  System  of  Italy  —  Com- 
panies of  Adventure  —  1,  foreign ;  Guarnieri,  Hawkwood  —  and  2,  native ; 
Braccio,  Sforza  —  Improvements  in  Military  Service  —  Arms,  offensive 
and  defensive  -  Invention  of  Gunpowder — Naples  -  -  First  Line  of  Anjou 

—  Joanna  I. — Ladislaus  —  Joanna  II.  —  Francis  Sforza  becomes  Duke 
of  Milan  —  Alfonso  King  of  Naples  —  State  of  Italy  during  the  Fifteenth 
Century  —  Florence  —  Rise  of  the  Medici,  and  Ruin  of  their  Adversaries 
—Pretensions  of  Charles  VIII.  to  Naples 390 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  HISTORY   OF   SPAIN  TO  THE   CONQUEST   OF    fiRANADA. 

Kingdom  of  the  Visigoths  —  Conquest  of  Spain  by  the  Moors  —  Gradual 
Revival  of  the  Spanish  Nation  —  Kingdoms  of  Leon,  Aragon,  Navarre, 
and  Castile  successively  formed  —  Chartered  Towns  of  Castile  —  Mili- 


XX  CONTEXTS   OF  THE    FIRST   VOLUME. 

tary  Orders — Conquest  of  Ferdinand  III.  and  James  of  Aragon- 
Causes  of  the  Delay  in  expelling  the  Moors  —  History  of  Castile  con- 
tinued—  Character  of  the  Government  —  Peter  the  Cruel  —  House  of 
Trastamare  —  John  II.  —  Henry  IV.  —  Constitution  of  Castile  —  Na- 
tional Assemblies  or  Cortes  —  Their  constituent  Parts  —  Right  of  Taxa- 
tion—  Legislation  —  Privy  Council  of  Castile  — Laws  for  the  Protection 
of  Liberty  —  Imperfections  of  the  Constitution  —  Aragon  —  its  History 
in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  Centuries —  Disputed  Succession  —  Con 
Btitution  of  Aragon  —  Free  Spirit  of  its  Aristocracy  —  Privilege  of  Union 

—  Powers  of  the  Justiza —  Legal  Securities  —  Illustrations  —  Other  Con- 
stitutional Laws  —  Valencia  and  Catalonia  —  Union  of  two  Crowns  by 
the  Marriage  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  —  Conquest  of  Granada 485 

Note  to  Chapter  TV 54] 

CHAPTER  T. 

HISTORY    OK    GERMANY  TO   THE   DIET   OF    WORMS    IN   1495. 

Sketch  of  German  History  under  the  Emperors  of  the  House  of  Saxony  - 
House  of  Franconia —  Henry  IV.  —  House  of  Suabia  —  Frederic  Bar 
barossa  —  Fall  of  Henry  the  Lion  —  Frederic  II.  —  Extinction  of  House 
of  Suabia  —  Changes  in  the  Germanic  Constitution  —  Electors — Terri- 
torial Sovereignty  of  the  Princes  —  Rodolph  of  Hapsburgh  —  State  of 
the  Empire  after  his  Time  —  Causes  of  Decline  of  Imperial  Power  — 
House  of  Luxemburg  —  Charles  IV.  —  Golden  Bull  —  House  of  Austria 

—  Frederic  III.  —  Imperial  C;ties —  Provincial  States  —  Maximilian  — 
Diet  of  Worms  —  Abolition  of  private  Wars  —  Imperial  Chamber  —  Aulic 
Council  —  Bohemia  —  Hungary  —  Switzerland 545 

CHAPTER  VI. 

HI8TORY   OF  THE   GREEKS   AND   SARACENS. 

llise  of  Mohammedism  —  Causes  of  its  Success  —  Progress  of  Saracen 
Arms  —  Greek  Empire  —  Decline  of  the  Khalifs  —  The  Greeks  recover 
Part  of  their  Losses  —  The  Turks  —  The  Crusades  —  Capture  of  Con- 
stantinople by  the  Latins — its  Recovery  by  the  Greeks — The  Moguls 

—  The  Ottomans  —  Danger  at  Constantinople  —  Timur  —  Capture  of 
Constantinople  by  Mahomet  II.  —  Alarm  of  Europe 590 

CHAPTER  VII. 

HISTORY   OF   ECCLESIASTICAL  POWER   DURING  THE   MIDDLE   AGES- 

Part  I. 

Wealth   of  the  Clergy  —  its  Sources  —  Encroachments  on  Ecelesiastica 
Property  —  their    Jurisdiction  —  arbitrative  —  coercive  —  their   politica) 


CONTENTS  OF  THE  FIRST  VOLUME.  xxl 

fower — Supremacy  of  the  Crown  —  Charlemagne  —  Change  after  his 
Death,  and  Encroachments  of  the  Church  in  the  Ninth  Century  — 
Primacy  of  the  See  of  Rome  — its  early  Stage  —  Gregory  I.  —  Council 
of  Frankfort  —  False  Decretals  —  Progress  of  Papal  Authority  —  Effects 
of  Excommunication  —  Lothaire  —  State  of  the  Church  in  the  Tenth 
Century  — Marriage  of  Priests  —  Simony  —  Episcopal  Elections  —  Im- 
perial Authority  over  the  Popes  —  Disputes  concerning  Investitures  — 
Gregory  VII.  and  Henry  IV.  —  Concordat  of  Calixtus  —  Election  by 
Chapters  —  General  System  of  Gregory  VII.  —  Progress  of  Papal  Usur- 
pations in  the  Twelfth  Century  —  Innocent  III. —  his  Character  and 
Rchemes, g!4 


VIEW 


OF 


THE    STATE    OF     EUROPE 

DURING  THE  MIDDLE   AGES. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE  HISTORY  OP  FRANCE,  FROM  ITS  CONQUEST  BY  CL0W8 
TO    THE    INVASION    OF   NAPLES    BY    CHARLES  VIII. 


PART   I. 


Pft.ll  of  the  Roman  Emptre —  Invasion  of  Clovis  —  First  Race  of  French  Kings  — 
Accession  of  Pepin  —  State  of  Italy  —  Charlemagne  —  His  Reign  and  Character 
—  Louis  the  Debonair  —  His  Successors  —  Calamitous  State  of  the  Empire  in  the 
ninth  and  tenth  Centuries  —  Accession  of  Hugh  Capet  —  His  first  Successors  — 
Louis  VII.  -  -  Philip  Augustus  —  Couquest  of  Normandy  —  War  in  Languedoc  — 
Louis  IX.  -  -  His  Character  —  Digression  upon  the  Crusades  —  Philip  III.  —  Philip 
IV.  —  Aggrandizement  of  French  Monarchy  under  his  Reign  —  Reigns  of  his 
Children  --  Question  of  Salic  Law  —  Claim  of  Edward  III. 

Before  the  conclusion  of  the  fifth  century  the  mighty  fabric 
of  empire  which  valor  and  policy  had  founded  upon  the  seven 
hills  of  Rome  was  finally  overthrown  in  all  the  west  Subversion  0, 
of  Europe  by  the  barbarous  nations  from  the  north,  the  Roman 
whose  martial  energy  and  whose  numbers  were  ir-    mpir< 
resistible.   A  race  of  men,  formerly  unknown  or  despised,  had 
not  only  dismembered  that  proud  sovereignty,  but 
permanently  settled  themselves  in  its  fairest  prov-  ments  of  the 
inces,  and  imposed  their  yoke  upon  the  ancient  JjjJJJJJ"8 
poswssors.     The  Vandals  were  masters  of  Africa  ; 
the  Suevi  held  part  of  Spain  ;  the  Visigoths  possessed  the 
remainder,  with  a  large  portion  of  Gaul ;  the  Burgundians 
occupied  the  provinces  watered  by  the  Rhone  and  Saone ; 
the  Ostrogoths  almost  all  Italy.     The  north-west  of  Gaul, 
between  the  Seine  and  the  Loire,  some  writers  have  filled 


16 


INVASION   OF   CLOVIS.         Chap.  I.  Pabt  i 


with  an  Armorican  republic ; l  while  the  remainder  was  still 
nominally  .subject  to  the  Roman  empire,  and  governed  by  a 
certain  Syagrius,  rather  with  an  independent  than  a  deputed 
authority. 

At  this  time  Clovis,  king  of  the  Salian  Franks,  a  tribe  of 
invasion  of  Germans  long  connected  with  Rome,  and  originally 
ciovis.  settled  upon  the  right  hank  of  the  Rhine,3  but  who 

i.D.  488  iia(]  latterly  penetrated  as  far  as  Tournay  aL.d 
Cambray,1  invaded  Gaul,  and  defeated  Syagrius  at  Soissons. 
The  result  of  this  victory  was  the  subjugation  of  those  prov- 
inces which  had  previously  been  considered  as  Roman.  But 
as  their  allegiance  had  not  been  very  strict,  so  their  loss  was 
not  very  severely  felt ;  since  the  emperors  of  Constantinople 
were  not  too  proud  to  confer  upon  Clovis  the  titles  of  consul 
and  patrician,  which  he  was  too  prudent  to  refuse.4 

Some  years  after  this,  Clovis   defeated  the   Alemanni,  or 


i  It  is  impossible  not  to  speak  scepti- 
cally as  to  this  republic,  or  rather  confed- 
eration of  independent  cities  under  the 
rule  of  their  respective  bishops,  which 
Dubos  has  with  great  ingenuity  raised 
upon  a  passage  of  Zosimus,  but  in  defi- 
ance of  the  silence  of  Gregory,  whose  see 
of  Tours  bordered  upon  their  supposed 
territory.  Yet  his  hypothesis  is  not  to 
be  absolutely  rejected,  because  it  is  by 
no  means  deficient  in  internal  proba- 
bility, and  the  early  part  of  Gregory's 
history  is  brief  and  negligent.  Dubos, 
Hist.  Critique  de  FEtablissement  des 
Francais  dans  les  Gaules,  t.  i.  p.  253. 
Gibbon,  c.  38,  after  following  Dubos  in 
his  text,  whispers  as  usual,  his  suspicions 
in  a  note.    [Note  I.] 

2  TNoteII.J 

3  The  system  of  Pere  Daniel  who  de- 
nies any  permanent  settlement  of  the 
Franks  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine 
before  Clovis,  seems  incapable  of  being 
supported.  It  is  difficult  to  resist  the 
presumption  that  arises  from  the  dis- 
covery of  the  tomb  and  skeleton  of 
Cbilderic,  father  of  Clovis,  at  Tournay, 
in  1653.  See  Montfaucon,  Monumens 
de  la  Monarchic  Francaise,  tome  i.  p. 
10. 

4  The  theory  of  Dubos,  who  considers 
Clovis  as  a  sort  of  lieutenant  of  the  em- 
perors, and  as  governing  the  Roman  part 
of  his  subjects  by  no  other  title,  has 
justly  seemed  extravagant  to  later  crit- 
ical Inquirers  Into  the  history  of  France. 
But  it  may  nevertheless  be  true  that  the 
connection  between  him  and  the  empire, 
and  the  emblems  of  Roman  magistracy 


which  he  bore,  reconciled  the  conquered 
to  their  new  masters.  This  is  judiciously 
stated  b\r  the  Duke  de  Nivernois,  Mem. 
de  l'Acad.  des  Inscrip.,  tome  xx.  p.  174 
[Note  TIJ.]  In  the  sixth  century,  how- 
ever, the  Greeks  appear  to  have  been 
nearly  ignoraut  of  Clovis's  countrymen. 
Nothing  can  be  made  out  of  a  passage 
in  Procopius  where  he  seems  to  men- 
tion the  Armoricans  under  the  name 
' ApfidpvXOl ;  and  Agathias  gives  a 
strangely  romantic  account  of  the 
Franks,  whom  he  extols  for  their  con- 
formity to  Roman  Laws,  TToTilTEia  <!)£  TU 
noXhu  xpuvrai  'Pufiainy,  nai  vbp.ou, 
rolg  avrolq,  nal  tu  uAAa  6/j.o/ug  tifityi 
re  tu  cvfij36?i.aia  nai  yo/xovg  nal  rijv 
tov  $eiov  $epa7T£iav  vo/j.i(ovm  .... 
Ifioi  ye  doKovci  o<pddpa  rival  noofuoi 

T£    KOI    aOTElOTClTOL.  Ov6eV    TE  EX^LV  Td 

6tak7i.arrov ,  ?"/  p,hvov  to  ftapjlupiKOv 
Tfjq  GToXr/g,  nal  to  ti/c  (povr/s  idia&v. 

He  goes  on  to  commend  their  mutual 
union,  and  observes  particularly  that,  in 
partitions  of  the  kingdom,  which  .had 
frequently  been  made,  they  had  never 
taken  up  arms  against  each  other,  nor 
polluted  the  land  with  civil  bloodshed. 
One  would  almost  believe  him  ironical. 
The  history  of  Agathias  conies  down  to 
A.D.  659.  At  this  time  many  of  th« 
savage  murders  and  other  crimes  which 
fill  the  pages  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  a 
writer  somewhat  more  likely  to  know 
the  truth  than  a  Byzantine  rhetorician, 
had  taken  pUce 


9  txzc*. 


HIS  CONVERSION. 


17 


SwabUns,  in  a  great  battle  at   Zulpich,  near  Cologne.     In 
consequence  of  a  vow,  as  it  is  said,  made  during  this  eno-a^e- 
ment,1  and  at  the  instigation  of  his  wife  Clotilda,  a  princess 
of  Burgundy,  he  became  a  convert  to  Christianity. 
It  would  be   a  fruitless  inquiry  whether  he  was  AD" 
sincere   in  this  change;  but   it  is    certain,  at  least,  that  no 
policy  could  have  been  more  successful.     The  Arian  sect, 
which    had    been    early   introduced    among    the    barbarous 
nations,    was    predominant,    though    apparently    without   in- 
tolerance,2 in  the  Burgundian  and  Visigoth  courts;  but  the 
clergy  of   Gaul  were   strenuously  attached  to  the    Catholic 
side,  and,  even   before  his  conversion,  had  favored  the  arms 
of  Clovis.     They  now  became  his  most  zealous   supporters, 
and  were  rewarded  by  him  with  artful  gratitude,  and  by  his 
descendants   with   lavish  munuicence.      Upon   the 
pretence  of  religion,  he  attacked  Alaric,  king  of  the  AD' 
Visigoths,  and,  by  one  great  victory  near  Poitiers  overthrow- 
ing  their   empire  in   Gaul,  reduced  them   to  the  maritime 
province  of  Septimania,  a  narrow  strip  of  coast  between  the 


1  Gregory  of  Tours  makes  a  very  rhe- 
torical story  of  this  famous  vow,  which, 
though  we  cannot  disprove,  it  may  be 
permitted  to  suspect.  —  L.  ii.  c.  30. 

2  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  par  Vich  et  Vais- 
sette,  tome  i.  p.  238;  Gibbon,  c.  37.  A 
specious  objection  might  be  drawn  from 
the  history  of  the  Gothic  monarchies  in 
Italy,  as  well  as  Gaul  and  Spain,  to  the 
great  principles  of  religious  toleration. 
These  Arian  sovereigns  treated  their 
Catholic  subjects,  it  may  be  said,  with 
tenderness,  leaving  them  in  possession  of 
every  civil  privilege,  and  were  rewarded 
for  it  by  their  defection  or  sedition.  But 
in  answer  to  this  it  may  be  observed:  — 
1.  That  the  system  of  persecution  adopt- 
ed by  the  Vandals  in  Africa  succeeded  no 
better,  the  Catholics  of  that  province 
having  risen  against  them  upon  the 
landing  of  Belisarius:  2.  That  we  do  not 
know  what  insults  and  discouragements 
the  Catholics  of  Gaul  and  Italy  may 
have  endured,  especially  from  the  Arian 
bishops,  in  that  age  of  bigotry ;  although 
the  administrations  of  Alaric  and  Theo- 
doric  were  liberal  and  tolerant :  3.  That 
the  distinction  of  Arian  and  Catholic  was 
intimately  connected  with  that  of  Goth 
and  Roman,  of  conqueror  and  conquered; 
so  that  it  is  difficult  to  separate  the  ef- 
fects of  national  from  those  of  sectarian 
animosity. 

The    tolerance   of   the   Visigoth   sove- 
reigns   must     not    be    praised    without 
VOL.  I.— M-  2 


making  an  exception  for  Euric,  predeces- 
sor of  Alaric.  He  was  a  prince  of  some 
eminent  qualities,  but  so  zealous  in  hia 
religion  as  to  bear  hardly  on  his  Catholic 
subjects.  Sidonius  Apollinaris  loudly 
complains  that  no  bishoprics  were  per- 
mitted to  be  filled,  that  the  churches 
went  to  ruin,  and  that  Ariauism  made  a 
great  progress.  (Fauriel,  Hist,  de  la 
Gaule  Meridionale,  vol.  i.  p.  578.  Under 
Alaric  himself,  however,  as  well  as  under 
the  earlier  kings  of  the  Visigothic  dy- 
nasty, a  more  liberal  spirit  prevailed. 
Salvian.  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century,  extols  the  Visigothic  govern- 
ment, in  comparison  with  that  of  the 
empire,  whose  vices  and  despotism  had 
met  with  a  deserved  termination.  Eu- 
cherius  speaks  of  the  Burgundians  in  the 
same  manner.  (Id.  ibid,  and  vol.  ii.  p. 
28.)  Yet  it  must  have  been  in  itself 
mortifying  to  live  in  subjection  to  bar- 
barians and  heretics;  not  to  mention  the 
hospitality,  as  it  was  called,  which  the 
natives  were  obliged  to  exercise  towards 
the  invaders,  by  ceding  two  thirds  of 
their  lands.  What,  then,  must  the  West- 
ern empire  have  been,  when  such  a  con- 
dition was  comparatively  enviable  !  But 
it  is  more  than  probable  that  the  Gaulish 
bishops  subject  to  the  Visigoths  hailed 
the  invasion  of  the  Franks  with  sanguiu« 
hope,  and  were  undoubtedly  great  ga;n 
ers  by  the  exchange. 


18 


DESCENDANTS  OF  CLOVIS.      Chat.  I.  P>rt  l 


Rhone  and  the  Pyrenees.  The  last  exploits  of  Clovis  were 
the  reduction  of  certain  independent  chiefs  of  his  own  tribe 
and  family,  who  were  settled   in   the   neighborhood  of   the 

Rhine.1  All  these  he  put  to  death  by  force  or  treachery;  for 
he  was  cast  in  the  true  mould  of  conquerors,  and  may  justly 
be  ranked  among  the  first  of  his  class,  both  for  the  splendor 
and  the  guiltiness  of  his  ambition.2 

Clovis  left  four  sons ;  one  illegitimate,  or  at  least  born  be- 
fore his  conversion  ;  and  three  by  his  queen  Clotilda.  These 
nude-  four    made,  it   is  said,  an   equal    partition  of  his 

scendants.  dominions,  which  comprehended  not  only  France, 
a.d.  611.  but  the  western  and  central  parts  of  Germany, 
besides  Bavaria,  and  perhaps  Swabia,  which  wen;  governed 
by  their  own  dependent,  but  hereditary,  chiefs.  Thierry,  the 
eldest,  had  what  was  called  Australia,  the  eastern  or  Ger- 
man division,  and  fixed  his  capital  at  Metz ;  Clodomir,  at 
Orleans ;    Childebert,  at   Paris ;   and   Clotaire,   at    Soissons.8 


1  Modern  historians,  in  enumerating 
these  reguli,  call  one  of  them  king  of 
Hans.  But  it  is  difficult  to  understand 
how  a  chieftain,  independent  of  Clovis, 
could  have  been  settled  in  that  part  of 
France.  In  fact,  Gregory  of  Tours,  our 
only  authority,  does  not  say  that  this 
prince,  Regnoineris,  was  king  of  Mans, 
but  that  he  was  put  to  death  iu  that 
city:  apud  Cenomannis  civitatem  jussu 
Chiodovechi  interfectus  est. 

The  late  French  writers,  as  far  as  I 
hare  observed,  continue  to  place  a  kiug- 
doin  at  Mans.  It  is  certain,  neverthe- 
less, that  Gregory  of  Tours,  and  they 
have  no  other  evidence,  does  not  assert 
this;  and  his  expressions  rather  lead  to 
the  contrary;  since,  if  Kegnomeris  were 
king  of  Mans,  why  should  we  not  have 
been  informed  of  it?  It  is,  indeed,  im- 
possible to  determine  such  a  point  nega- 
tively from  our  scanty  materials;  but  if 
a  Frank  kingdom  had  been  formed  at 
Mans  before  the  battle  of  Soissons,  this 
must  considerably  alter  the  received  no- 
tions of  the  history  of  Gaul  in  the  fifth 
century  :  and  it  seems  difficult  to  under- 
stand how  it  could  have  sprung  up  after- 
ward-during  the  reign  of  Clovis. 

2  The  reader  will  be  gratified  by  an  ad- 
mirable memoir,  by  the  Duke  de  Niver- 
nois,  on  the  policy  of  Clovis,  iu  the 
twentieth  volume  of  the  Academy  of  In- 
Boriptious. 

■  Quatuor  filii  reginmi  accipinnt,  et 
inter  se  8Bq.ua  lance  dividunt. — Greg. 
Tur  1.  iii.  c.  1.  It  would  rather  perplex 
a  geographer  to  make  an  equal  division 


of  Clovis's  empire  into  portions,  of  which 
Paris,  Orleans,  Metz,  and  Soissons  should 
be  the  respective  capitals.  I  apprehend, 
in  fact,  that  Gregory's  expression  is  not 
very  precise.  The  kingdom  of  Soissons 
seems  to  have  been  the  least  of  the  four, 
and  that  of  Australia  the  greatest.  But 
the  partitions  made  by  these  princes 
were  exceedingly  complex;  insulated 
fragments  of  territory,  and  even  undi- 
vided shares  of  cities,  being  allotted  to 
the  worse-provided  brothers,  by  way  of 
compensation,  out  of  the  larger  king 
doms.  It  would  be  very  difficult  to 
ascertain  the  limits  of  these  minor  mon- 
archies. But  the  French  empire  was  al- 
ways considered  as  one,  whatever  might 
be  the  number  of  its  inheritors;  and 
from  accidental  circumstances  it  was  sc 
frequently  reunited  as  fully  to  keep  up 
this  notion. 

M.  Fauriel  endeavors  to  show  the 
equality  of  this  partition  (Hist,  de  la 
Gaule  Meridionale,  vol.  ii.  p.  92.)  But 
he  is  obliged  to  suppose  that  Germany 
beyond  the  Rhine,  part  of  which  owned 
the  dominion  of  Clovis,  was  counted  as 
nothing,  not  being  inhabited  by  Franks. 
It  was  something,  nevertheless,  in  the 
scale  of  power  ;  since  from  this  fertilt 
source  the  Austrasian  kings  continually 
recruited  their  armies.  Aquitaine,  that 
is,  the  provinces  south  of  the  Loire,  wafl 
divided  into  three,  or  rather  perhaps  two 
portions.  For  though  Thierry  and  Childe- 
bert had  considerable  territories,  it  seem* 
not  certain  that  Clodomir  took  any  share 
and  improbable  that  Clotaire  had  one. 


FKA.NCK. 


DESCENDANTS   OF  CLOVIS. 


19 


a!d.  56fe. 


sons, 


and 


A.D.  613. 


During  their  reigns  the  monarchy  was  aggrandized  by  the  con- 
quest of  Burgundy.  Clotaire,  the  youngest  brother, 
ultimately  reunited  all  the  kingdoms ;  but  upon  his 
death  they  were  again  divided  among  his  four 
brought  together  a  second  time  by  another  Clo- 
taire, the  grandson  to  the  first.  It  is  a  weary  and 
unprofitable  task  to  follow  these  changes  in  detail,  through 
scenes  of  tumult  and  bloodshed,  in  which  the  eye  meets 
with  no  sunshine,  nor  can  rest  upon  any  interesting  spot.  It 
would  be  difficult,  as  Gibbon  has  justly  observed,  to  find  any- 
where more  vice  or  less  virtue.  The  names  of  two  queens 
are  distinguished  even  in  that  age  for  the  magnitude  of  their 
crimes :  Fredegonde,  the  wife  of  Chilperic,  of  whose  atroci- 
ties none  have  doubted ;  and  Brunehaut,  queen  of  Austrasia, 
who  has  met  with  advocates  in  modern  times,  less,  perhaps, 
from  any  fair  presumptions  of  her  innocence  than  from  com- 
passion for  the  cruel  death  which  she  underwent.1 


Thierry,  therefore,  king  of  Austrasia, 
may  be  reckoned  the  best  provided  of  the 
brethren.  It  will  be  obvious  from  the 
map  that  the  four  capitals,  Metz,  Sois- 
eons.  Paris,  and  Orleans,  are  situated  at 
no  great  distance  from  each  other,  rela- 
tively to  the  whole  of  France.  They 
were,  therefore,  in  the  centre  of  force ; 
and  the  brothers  might  have  lent  assis- 
tance to  each  other  in  case  of  a  national 
revolt. 

The  cause  of  this  complexity  in  the 
partition  of  Frauce  among  the  sons  of 
Clovis  has  been  conjectured  by  Dubos, 
with  whom  Sismoudi  (vol.  i.  p.  242) 
agrees,  to  have  been  their  desire  of  own- 
ing as  subjects  an  equal  number  of 
Franks.  This  is  supported  by  a  passage 
in  Agathias,  quoted  by  the  former,  Hist, 
de  l'Etablissement,  vol.  ii.  p.  413.  Others 
have  fancied  that  Aquitaine  was  reck- 
oned too  delicious  a  morsel  to  be  enjoyed 
by  only  one  brother.  In  the  second  great 
partition,  that  of  567  (for  tnat  of  561  did 
not  last  long),  when  Sigebert,  Gontran, 
»nd  Chilperic  took  the  kingdoms  of  Aus- 
trasia, Burgundy,  and  what  was  after- 
wards called  Neustria,  the  southern 
provinces  were  again  equally  divided. 
Thus  Marseilles  fell  to  the  lung  of  Paris, 
or  Neustria,  while  Aix  and  Avignon  were 
in  the  lot  of  Burgundy. 

1  Every  history  will  give  a  sufficient 
epitome  of  the  Meroviigian  dynasty. 
The  facts  of  these  times  are  of  little  other 
Importance  than  as  they  impress  on  the 
mind  a  thorough  notion  of  the  extreme 
wickedness  of  almost  every  person  con- 


cerned in  them,  and  consequently  of 
the  state  to  which  society  was  reduced 
But  there  is  no  advantage  in  crowding 
the  memory  with  barbarian  wars  and 
assassinations.     [Note  IV.] 

For  the  question  about  Brunehaut's 
character,  who  has  had  partisans  al- 
most as  enthusiastic  as  those  of  Mary  of 
Scotland,  the  reader  may  consult  Pas- 
quier,  Recherches  de  la  France,  I.  viii., 
or  Velly,  Hist,  de  France,  tome  i.,  on  one 
side,  and  a  dissertation  by  Gaillard,  in 
the  Memoirs  of  the  Academy  of  Inscrip- 
tions, tome  xxx.,  on  the  other.  The  last 
is  unfavorable  to  Brunehaut,  and  per- 
fectly satisfactory  to  rny  judgment. 

Brunehaut  was  no  unimportant  per- 
sonage in  this  history.  She  had  become 
hateful  to  the  Austrasian  aristocracy  by 
her  Gothic  blood,  and  still  more  by  her 
Roman  principles  of  government.  There 
was  evidently  a  combination  to  throw  off 
the  yoke  of  civilized  tyranny.  It  was  a 
great  conflict,  which  ended  in  the  virtual 
dethronement  of  the  house  of  Clovis. 
Much,  therefore,  may  have  been  exag- 
gerated by  Fredegarius,  a  Burgundiau  by 
birth,  in  relating  the  crimes  of  Brune- 
haut. But,  unhappily,  the  aTitecedent 
presumption,  in  the  history  of  that  age, 
is  always  on  the  worse  side.  She  was  un- 
questionably endowed  with  a  masculine 
energy  of  mind,  and  very  superior  to 
such  a  mere  imp  of  audacious  wickedness 
as  Fredegonde  Brunehaut  left  a  great 
and  almost  fabulous  name ;  public  cause- 
ways, towers,  castles,  in  different  parts 
of  France,  are  popularly  ascribed  to  her 


20  MAYORS   OF  THE  PALACE.     Chap.  1.  Pari 

But  after  Dagobert,  son  of  Clotaire  II.,  the  kings  of 
4.d.  62&-C88  France  dwindled  into  personal  insignificance,  and 
are  generally  treated  by  later  historians  as  insen- 
degeueracy.  sati,  or  idiots.1  The  whole  power  of  the  kingdom 
Mayors  of  devolved  upon  the  mayors  of  the  palace,  originally 
the  palace.  0fficer8  0f  the  household,  through  whom  petitions 
or  representations  were  laid  before  the  king.2  The  weakness 
of  sovereigns  rendered  this  office  important,  and  still  greater 
weakness  suffered  it  to  become  elective ;  men  of  energetic  ' 
talents  and  ambition  united  it  with  military  command ;  and  | 
the  history  of  France  for  half  a  century  presents  no.  names' 
more  conspicuous  than  those  of  Ebroin  and  Grimoald,  may- 
ors" ol  JNeustria  and  Austrasia,  the  western  and  eastern  divi- 
sions of  tHe  French  fittOTrarcfiyl8  These,  however,  met  with 
violent  ends ;  but  a  more  successful  usurper  of  the  royal 
authority  was  Pepin  Heristal,  first  mayor,  and  afterwards 
duke,  of  Austrasia ;  who  united  with  almost  an  avowed 
sovereignty  over  that  division  a  paramount  command  over  the 
French  or  Neustrian  provinces,  where  nominal  kings  of  the 
Merovingian  family  were  still  permitted  to  exist.4  This  au- 
thority he  transmitted  to  a  more  renowned  hero,  his  son, 
Charles  Martel,  who,  after  some  less  important  exploits,  was 
called  upon  to  encounter  a  new  and  terrible  enemy.  The 
Saracens,  after  subjugating  Spain,  had  penetrated  into  the 
732  very  heart  of  France.  Charles  Martel  gained  a 
complete  victory  over  them  between  Tours  and 
Poitiers,6  in  which  300,000  Mohammedans  are  hyperbolically 

It  has  even  been  saspected  by  some  that  that  denominated  Neustria,  to  which  Bur- 
she  suggested  the  appellation  of  Brune-  gundy  was  generally  appendant,  though 
•hildin  the  Nibelungen  Lied.  That  there  distinctly  governed  by  a  mayor  of  its 
Is  no  resemblance  in  the  story,  or  in  the  own  election.  But  Aquitaine,  the  exact 
character,  courage  excepted,  of  the  two  bounds  of  which  I  do  not  know,  was, 
heroines,  cannot  be  thought  an  objec-  from  the  time  of  Dagobert  I.,  separated 
tion.  from  the  rest  of  the  monarchy,  under  a 

1  An  ingenious  attempt  is  made  by  the  ducal    dynasty,    sprung    from    Aribert, 
Abbe  Vertot,  Mem.  de  l'Academie,  tome  brother  of  that  monarch.     [Note  VI.] 
vi.,  to  rescue  these  mouarchs  from  this  [4  Note  VII.] 

iong-established    imputation.     But     the  5  Toui-s  is  above  seventy  miles  distant 

leading  fact  is  irresistible,  that    all  the  from  Poitiers;  but  I  do  not  find  that  any 

royal    authority   was  lost    during    their  French  antiquary  has  been  able  to  ascer 

reigns.     However,  the  best  apology  seems  tain   the   place  of  this  great  battle  with 

to  be,  that,  after  the  victories  of  Pepin  more   precision ;    which    is    remarkable, 

Heristal,  the  Merovingian  kings  were,  in  since,  after  so  immense  a  slaughter,  we 

effect,  conquered,  and    their  inefficiency  should  expect  the  testimony  of  "  grandia 

was  a  matter  of  necessary  submission  to  effossis  ossa  sepulcris."     It  is  now,  how- 

a  master.  ever,  believed  that  the  slaughter  at  the 

2  [Note  V.]  battle   near   Poitiers   was   by   no   means 

3  The  original  kingdoms  of  Soissons,  immense,    and   even   that  the  Saraceui 
Paris,  and  Orleans  were  consolidated  into  retired  without  a  decisive  action      (Sis- 


F-kanck.  ACCESSION   OF   PEPIN.  21 

asserted  to  have  fallen.  The  reward  of  thiu  victory  was  thf 
province  of  Septimania,  which  the  Saracens  had  conquered 
from  the  Visigoths.1 

Such  powerful  subjects  were  not  likely  to  remain  long  con- 
tented without  the  crown  ;  but  the  circumstances  un- 
der which  it  was  transferred  from  the  race  of  Clovis    the  royal 
are  connected  with  one  of  the  most  important  revo-    Accession 
lutions  in  the  history  of  Europe.     The  mayor  Pe-   of  Pepin. 
pin,  inheriting  his  father  Charles  Martel's  talents   AD' 
and  ambition,  made,  in  the  name  and  with  the  consent  of  the 
nation,  a  solemn  reference  to  the  Pope  Zacharias,  as  to  the 
deposition  of  Childeric  III.,  under  whose  nominal  authority 
he  himself  was  reigning.     The  decision  was  favorable  ;  that 
he  who  possessed  the  power  should  also  bear  the  title  of  king. 
The  unfortunate  Merovingian  was  dismissed  into  a  convent, 
and  the  Franks,  with  one  consent,  raised  Pepin  to  the  throne, 
the  founder  of  a  more  illustrious  dynasty.2     In  order  to  judge 
of  the  importance  of  this  revolution  to  the  see  of  Rome,  as 
well  as  to  France,  we  must  turn  our  eyes  upon  the  affairs 
of  Italy. 

The  dominion  of  the  Ostrogoths  was  annihilated  by  the 
arms  of  Belisarius  and  Narses  in  the  sixth  century,  The  Lom- 
and  that  nation  appears  no  more  in  history.  But  Dards- 
not  long  afterwards  the  Lombards,  a  people  for  some  time 
settled  in  Pannonia,  not  only  subdued  that  northern  part  of 
Italy  which  has  retained  their  name,  but,  extending  themselves 
southward,  formed  the  powerful  duchies  of  Spoleto  and  Bene- 
vento.  The  residence  of  their  kings  was  in  Pavia ;  but  the 
hereditary  vassals,  who  held    those    two  duchies,  might  be 


mondi,  ii.  132;  Michelet,  ii.  13.)  There  can  Was  not  this  the  fatal  error  by  which 

be  no  doubt  but  that  the  battle   was  Roderic  had  lost  his  kingdom?     Was  it 

fought  much  nearer  to  Poitiers  than  to  possible   that   the   Saracens   could  have 

Tours.  retained  any  permanent   possession  of 

The  victory  of  Charles  Martel  has  im-  France    except  by  means    of  a  victory  ? 

mortalized   his  name,  and  may  justly  be  And  did  not  the  contest  upon  the  broad 

reskoned    among    those    tew   battles  of  champaign  of  Poitou  afford  them  a  cor^ 

which  a  contrary  event  would  have  es-  siderable  prospect  of  success,  which    a 

sentially  varied   the  drama  of  the  world  more  cautious  policy  would  have  with 

In  all  its  subsequent  scenes;  with  Mara-  held? 

thon,   Arbela,    the  Metaurus,   Chalons,  *  This    conquest    was     completed    by 

und  Leipsic.     Yet  do  we  not  judge  a  lit-  Pepin  in  759.     The  inhabitants  preserved 

tie  too  much  by  the  event,  and  follow,  as  their  liberties   by  treaty;  and  Vfds3et;e 

usual,  in  the  wake  of  fortune?    Has  not  deduces  from  this  solemn  assurance  tLe 

more    frequent    experience    condemned  privileges  of  Languedoc.  —  Hist,  de  Lany. 

those  who  set  the  fate  of  empires  upon  a  tome  i.  p.  412. 

single  cast,  and  risk  a  general  battle  with  2  [Note  VIII 
invaders,  whose  greater  peril  is  in  delay  ? 


22  CHARLEMAGNE.  Chai'.  I.  Pabt  I. 

leemed  almost  independent  sovereigns.1  Tiie  rest  of  Italy 
svas  governed  by  exarchs,  deputed  by  the  Greek  emperors, 
and  fixed  at  Ravenna.  In  Rome  itself  neither  the  people 
nor  the  bishops,  who  had  already  conceived  in  part  their 
schemes  of  ambition,  were  much  inclined  to  endure  the  supe- 
riority of  Constantinople;  yet  their  disaffection  was  counter 
balanced  by  the  inveterate  hatred  as  well  as  jealousy,  with 
which  they  regarded  the  Lombards.  But  an  impolitic  and 
intemperate  persecution,  carried  on  by  two  or  three  Greek 
emperors  against  a  favorite  superstition,  the  worship  of  im- 
ages, excited  commotions  throughout  Italy,  of  which  the  Lom- 
They  bards  took  advantage,  and  easily  wrested  the  ex- 

reduce  the      archate  of  Ravenna  from  the  eastern  empire.     It 

exarchate  en  1  i  c     i  i      • 

of  Ravenna,  was  tar  from  the  design  of  the  popes  to  see  their 
a.d.  <o2;  nearest  enemies  so  much  aggrandized;  and  any 
effectual  assistance  from  the  emperor  Constantine  Coprony- 
mus  would  have  kept  Rome  still  faithful.  But  having  no 
hope  from  his  arms,  and  provoked  by  Ins  obstinate  intolerance, 
the  pontiffs  had  recourse  to  France ; 2  and  the  service  they 
had  rendered  to  Pepin  led  to  reciprocal  obligations  of  the 
which  greatest  magnitude.     At    the  request  of  Stephen 

Pepin  II,  the  new  king  of   France  descended  from  the 

and  bestows  Alps,  drove  the  Lombards  from  their  recent  con- 
on  the  pope.  qUests?  an(j  conferred  them  upon  the  pope.  This 
memorable  donation  nearly  comprised  the  modern  provinces 
of  Romagna  and  the  March  of  Ancona.8 

The  state  of  Italy,  which  had  undergone  no  change  for 
nearly  two  centuries,  was  now  rapidly  verging  to  a  great 
_    ,  revolution.     Under  the  shadow  of  a  mighty  name 

Charlemagne.     ,/->,,  ....  ,     ,      ,  °      J       _  . 

the  Greek  empire  had  concealed  the  extent  of  its 
decline.  That  charm  was  now  broken  :  and  the 
Lombard  kingdom,  which  had  hitherto  appeared  the  only 
competitor  in  the  lists,  proved  to  have  lost  his  own  energy 
in  awaiting  the  occasion  for  its  display.  France  was  far 
more  than  a  match  for  the  power  of  Italy,  even  if  she  had 
not  been  guided  by  the  towering  ambition  and  restless  ac- 

iThe  history,  character,  and  policy  of  tures  to   Charles  Martel  as  well   as   to 

the  Lombards  are  well    treated   by  Gib-  Pepin  himself;   the  habitual  sagacity  of 

bon.  c.  45.     See,  too,  the  fourth  and  fifth  the  court  of  Rome  perceiving  the  growth 

books  of  Qiannone,  and  some  papers  by  of  a  new  western  monarchy,  which  would 

Gaillard  in  the  Memoirs  of  the  Academy  be,  in  faith  and  arms,  their  surest  all}. 

of  Inscriptions,  tomes  xxxii.,  xxxv.,  x!v.  Muratori,  Ann.  d'ltal.  a.d.  741. 

^There  bad  been  some  previous  over-  3  Giannone,  1.  v.  c.  2 


France.  CONQUESTS  OF  CHARLEMAGNE.  23 

tivity  of  the  son  of  Pepin.     It  was  almost  the  first  exploit 
of   Chailemagne,  after  the  death  of  his  brother  A  D  772_ 
Carloman  had  reunited  the  Frankish  empire  under  He  conquers 
his  dominion,1  to  subjugate  the  kingdom  of  Lorn-  L°mbardy; 
bardy.     Neither  Pavia  nor  Verona,  its  most  con-  AD-  774- 
siderable  cities,  interposed  any  material  delay  to  his  arms  : 
and  the  chief  resistance  he  encountered  was  from  the  dukes 
of  Friuli  and  Benevento,  the  latter  of  whom  could  never  be 
brought  into  thorough   subjection   to  the  conqueror.     Italy, 
however,  be  the  cause  what  it  might,  seems  to  have  tempted 
Charlemagne  far  less  than  the  dark  forests  of  Germany.    For 
neither  the  southern  provinces,  nor  Sicily,  could  have  with- 
stood his  power  if  it  had  been  steadily  directed  against  them. 
Even  Spain  hardlv  drew  so  much  of  his  attention       L  ,_    . 

i  t       t  n     i  •  •    i  ,  n      i  part  of  Spain; 

as  the  splendor  of  the  prize  might  naturally  have 
excited.  He  gained,  however,  a  very  important  accession  to 
his  empire,  by  conquering  from  the  Saracens  the  territory 
contained  between  the  Pyrenees  and  the  Ebro.  This  was 
formed  into  the  Spanish  March,  governed  by  the  count  of 
Barcelona,  part  of  which  at  least  must  be  considered  as  ap- 
pertaining to  France  till  the  twelfth  century.2 

But  the  most  tedious  and  difficult  achievement  of  Charle- 
magne was  the  reduction  of  the  Saxons.  The 
wars  with  this  nation,  who  occupied  nearly  the 
modern  circles  of  Westphalia  and  Lower  Saxony,  lasted  for 
thirty  years.  Whenever  the  conqueror  withdrew  his  armies, 
or  even  his  person,  the  Saxons  broke  into  fresh  rebellion, 
which  his  unparalleled  rapidity  of  movement  seldom  failed 
to  crush  without  delay.  From  such  perseverance  on  either 
side,  destruction  of  the  weaker  could  alone  result.  A  large 
colony  of  Saxons  were  finally  transplanted  into  Flanders  and 
Brabant,  countries  hitherto  ill-peopled,  in  which  their  descend- 

*  Carloman,  younger  brother  of  Charles,  kings  of  France,  till  some  time  after  their 

took  the  Austrasian  or  German  provinces  own  title  had   been  merged  in  that  of 

of  the  empire.     The  custom  of  partition  kings  of  Aragon.     In  1180  legal  instru- 

was  so  fully  established,  that  those  wise  ments  executed  in  Catalonia  ceased  to  be 

and  ambitious   princes,  Charles  Martcl,  dated  by  the  year  of  the  king  of  France; 

Pepin,  and  Charlemagne  himself,  did  not  and  as  there  certainly  remained  no  other 

venture  to  thwart  the  public  opinion  by  mark  of  dependence,  the  separation  of 

introducing    primogeniture.      Carloman  the  principality  may  be  referred  to  that 

would  not  long  have  stood  against  his  year.      But    the   rights   of  the    French 

brother;  who,  after  his  death,  usurped  crown    over    it    were    finally    ceded    by 

the  inheritance  of  his  two  infant  chil-  Louis  IX.   in    1258.     De  Marca,   Marca 

dren.  Hispanica,   p.   514.    Art  de  verifier  le* 

2  The  counts  of  Barcelona  always  ac-  Dates,  t.  L:   p.  291. 
knowledged  the  feudal  superiority  of  the 


•I A  EXTENT  OF   ITTS   DOMINIONS.    Chap.  I.  Part  i 

ants  preserved  the  same  unconquerable  spirit  of  resistance  to 
oppression.  Many  fled  to  the  kingdoms  of  Scandinavia,  and, 
mingling  with  the  Northmen,  who  were  jusl  preparing  to  run 
their  memorable  career,  revenged  upon  the  children  and  sub- 
jects of  Charlemagne  the  devastation  of  Saxony.  The  rem- 
nant embraced  Christianity,  their  aversion  to  which  had  beea 
the  chief  cause  of  their  rebellions,  and  acknowledged  thfc 
sovereignty  of  Charlemagne  —  a  submission  which  even 
Witikind,  the  second  Arminius  of  Germany,  after  such 
irresistible  conviction  of  her  destiny,  did  not  disdain  to 
make.  But  they  retained,  in  the  main,  their  own  laws ; 
they  were  governed  by  a  duke  of  their  own  nation,  if  not 
of  their  own  election  ;  and  for  many  ages  they  were  dis- 
tinguished by  their  original  character  among  the  nations  of 
Germany.1 

The  successes  of  Charlemagne  on  the  eastern  frontier  of 
his  empire  against  the  Sclavonians  of  Bohemia  and   Huns  or 
Avars  of   Pannonia,    though   obtained   with    less    cost,  were 
hardly  less  eminent.     In  all  his  wars  the  newly  conquered 
nations,    or   those    whom   fear   had    made    dependent    allies, 
were  employed  to  subjugate  their  neighbors,  and  the  inces- 
sant waste  of  fatigue  and  the  sword  was  supplied  by  a  fresh 
population  that  swelled  the  expanding  circle  of  dominion. 
Extent  of  his  I  d°  not  know  that  the  limits  of  the  new  western 
dominions.      empire  are  very  exactly  defined  by  contemporary 
writers,  nor  would  it  be  easy  to  appreciate  the  degree  of 
subjection  in  which  the  Sclavonian  tribes  were  held.     As  an 
organized  mass  of  provinces,  regularly  governed  by  imperial 
officers,  it  seems  to  have  been  nearly  bounded,  in  Germany, 
by  the  Elbe,  the  Saale,  the  Bohemian  mountains,  and  a  line 
drawn  from  thence  crossing  the  Danube  above  Vienna,  and 
prolonged  to  the  Gulf  of  Istria.     Part  of  Dalmatia  was  com- 
prised in  the  duchy  of  Friuli.     In  Italy  the  empire  extended 
not   much   beyond    the    modern    frontier  of  Naples,   if  we 
exclude,  as  was  the  fact,  the  duchy  of  Benevento  from  any- 
thing more  than  a  titular  subjection.    The  Spanish  boundary. 
as  has  been  said  already,  was  the  Ebro.2 

»  [NOTE  IX.]  the  Oder  and  frontiers  of  Poland.    The 

2  I  follow  in  this  the  map  of  Koch,  in  authors  of  L'Art  de  verifier  les  Dates 

his  Tableau  des  Revolutions  de  I'Europe,  extend  it  to  the  Raab.    It  would  require 

tome  i.     That  of  Vaugondy,  Paris,  1752,  a  long  examination  to  give  a  precise 

includes  the  dependent  Sclavonic  tribes,  statement. 

and  carries  the  limit  of  the  empire  to 


FiiANCE.  CORONATION   OF  CHARLEMAGNE.  25 

A  seal  was  put  to  the  glory  of  Charlemagne  when  Leo  III., 

in  the   name  of  the   Roman   people,  placed   upon  ms  corona- 
his  head  the  imperial  crown.     His  father,  Pepin,  p^52111" 
had  borne  the  title  of  Patrician,  and  he  had  him-  a.d.  800. 
self   exercised,   with    that    title,   a   regular   sovereignty  over 
Rome.1     Money  was  coined  in  his  name,  and  an  oath  of  fidel- 
ity was  taken  by  the  clergy  and  people.     But  the  appellation 
of  Emperor  seemed  to  place  his  authority  over  all  his  subjects 
on  a  new  footing.     It  was  full  of  high  and  indefinite  preten- 
sion, tending  to  overshadow  the  free  election  of  the   Franks 
by  a  fictitious  descent  from  Augustus.     A  fresh  oath  of  fidel- 
ity to  him  as  emperor  was  demanded  from  his  subjects.     His 
own  discretion,  however,  prevented  him  from  affecting  those 
more  despotic  prerogatives  which  the  imperial  name  might 
still  be  supposed  to  convey.'2 

In  analyzing  the  characters  of  heroes  it  is  hardly  possible 
to  separate  altogether  the  share  of  fortune  from 
their  own.  The  epoch  made  by  Charlemagne  in  c  arac 
the  history  of  the  world,  the  illustrious  families  which  prided 
themselves  in  him  as  their  progenitor,  the  very  legends  of 
romance,  which  are  full  of  his  fabulous  exploits,  have  cast  a 
lustre  around  his  head,  and  testify  the  greatness  that  has  em- 
bodied itself  in  his  name.  None,  indeed,  of  Charlemagne's 
wars  can  be  compared  with  the  Saracenic  victory  of  Charles 
Martel ;  but  that  was  a  contest  for  freedom,  his  for  conquest  ; 
and  fame  is  more  partial  to  successful  aggression  than  to  pat- 
riotic resistance.  As  a  scholar,  his  acquisitions  were  probably 
little  superior  to  those  of  his  unrespected  son  ;  and  in  several 
points  of  view  the  glory  of  Charlemagne  might  be  extenuated 

1  The  Patricians  of  the  lower  empire  abrogated.     Muratori,    Annali    d'ltalia, 

were  governors  sent  from  Constantinople  ad.  arm.  772;  St.  Marc,  t.  i.  p.  356,  372. 

to  the  provinces.     Home  had  long  been  A   mosaic,    still   extant   in    the   Lateran 

accustomed    to  their  name   and   power,  palace,  represents  our  Saviour  giving  the 

The    subjection    of    the    Romans,    both  keys  to  St.   Peter   with  one   hand,  and 

clergy  and  laity,  to  Charlemagne,  as  well  with  the  other  a  standard  to  a  crowned 

before   as   after    he    bore    the    imperial  prince,  bearing  the  inscription  Constan- 

name,  seems  to  be  established.     See  Dis-  tine   V.      But   Constantino   V.    did    not 

sertation  Historique,  par  le  Blanc,  sub-  begin  to  reign  till  780  ;  and  if  this  piece 

joined   to   his    Traite    de    Monnoyes   de  of  workmanship   was    made   under   Leo 

■France,    p.  18;   and    St.    Marc,    Abrege  III.,  as  the  authors  of  L' Art  de  verifier 

Chronologique  de  1'Histoire   de   l'ltalie,  les  Dates  imagine,  it  could  not  be  earlier 

t.  i.     The  first  of  these  writers  does  not  than   795.      T.    i.   p.   262;    Muratori   ad 

allow  that  Pepin  exercised  any  authority  ami.  798.     However   this  may  be,  there 

at  Rome.     A  goo>J  deal  of  obscurity  rests  can  be  no  question  that  a  considerable 

over   its    internal    government    for    near  share  of  jurisdiction  and  authority  mi 

fifty  years;  but  there  is  sonic  reason   to  practically  exercised  by  the  popes  during 

believe  that  the  nominal  sovereignty  of  this  period.     Vid.  Muiat.  ad  anu.  789. 

the   Greek    emperors    was    uot    entirely  -  [Note  X.] 


26         CHARACTER  OF  CHARLEMAGNE.  Chap.  I.  Part  l 

by  an  analytical  dissection.1  But  rejecting  a  mode  of  judging 
equally  uncandid  and  fallacious,  we  shall  find  that  he  pos- 
sessed in  everything  that  grandeur  of  conception  which  dis- 
tinguishes extraordinary  minds.  Like  Alexander,  he  seemed 
born  for  universal  innovation  :  in  a  life  restlessly  active,  we  see 
him  reforming  the  coinage  and  establishing  the  legal  divisions 
of  money  ;  gathering  about  him  the  learned  of  every  country  ; 
U  inding  schools  and  collecting  libraries  ;  interfering,  but  with 
the  tone  of  a  king,  in  religious  controversies  ;  aiming,  though 
prematurely,  at  the  formation  of  a  naval  force ;  attempting, 
for  the  sake  of  commerce,  the  magnificent  enterprise  of 
uniting  the  Rhine  and  Danube  ;  2  and  meditating  to  mould 
the  discordant  codes  of  Roman  and  barbarian  laws  into  an 
uniform  system. 

The  great  qualities  of  Charlemagne  were,  indeed,  alloyed 
by  the  vices  of  a  barbarian  and  a  conqueror.  Nine  wives, 
whom  he  divorced  with  very  little  ceremony,  attest  the 
license  of  his  private  life,  which  his  temperance  and  frugality 
can  hardly  be  said  to  redeem.  Unsparing  of  blood,  though 
not  constitutionally  cruel,  and  wholly  indifferent  to  the  means 
which  his  ambition  prescribed,  he  beheaded  in  one  day  four 
thousand  Saxons  —  an  act  of  atrocious  butchery,  after  which 
his  persecuting  edicts,  pronouncing  the  pain  of  death  against 
those  who  refused  baptism,  or  even  who  ate  flesh  during 
Lent,  seem  scarcely  worthy  of  notice.  This  union  of  bar- 
barous ferocity  with  elevated  views  of  national  improvement 
might  suggest  the  parallel  of  Peter  the  Great.  But  the 
degrading  habits  and  brute  violence  of  the  Muscovite  place 
him  at  an  immense  distance  from  the  restorer  of  the  empire. 

A  strong  sympathy  for  intellectual  excellence  was  the 
leading  characteristic  of  Charlemagne,  and  this  undoubtedly 
biassed  him  in  the  chief  political  error  of  his  conduct  —  that 
of  encouraging  the  power  and  pretensions  of  the  hierarchy. 
But,  perhaps,  his  greatest  eulogy  is  written  in  the  disgraces 
of  succeeding  times  and  the  miseries  of  Europe.  He  stands 
alone,  like  a  beacon  upon  a  waste,  or  a  rock  in  the  broad 

1  Eginhard  attests  his  ready  eloquence,        -  See  an  essay  upon  this  project  in  the 

his  perfect  mastery  of  Latin,  his  knowl-  Memoirs  of  the  Academy  of  Inscriptions, 

edge  of  Greek  so  far  as  to  read  it,  his  t.  xviii.    The  rivers  which  were  designed 

acquisitions  In  logic,  grammar,  rhetoric,  to  form  the  links  of  this  junction  werfl 

and    astronomy.    But    the    anonymous  the  AltmuU,  the  Regnito,  and  the  Main : 

authors  of  the  life  of  Louis  the  Debonair  but  their  want  of  depth,  and  the  spongi- 

attrihutes  most  of  these  accomplishments  ness  of  the  soil,  appear  to  present  insu 

5o  that  unfortunate  prince.  perable  impediments  to  ite  completion. 


USANCE.  LOUIS   THE   DEBONAIR.  27 

ocean.  His  sceptre  was  tbe  bow  of  Ulysses,  which  could  not 
be  drawn  by  any  weaker  hand.  In  the  dark  ages  of  European 
history  the  raign  of  Charlemagne  affords  a  solitary  resting- 
place  between  two  long  periods  of  turbulence  and  igno- 
miny, deriving  the  advantages  of  contrast  both  from  that  of 
the  preceding  dynasty  and  of  a  posterity  for  whom  he  had 
formed  an  empire  which  they  were  unworthy  and  unequal  to 
maintain.1 

Pepin,  the  eldest  son  of  Charlemagne,  died  before  him, 
leaving   a    natural   son,   named    Bernard-2     Even  T    •  *u 

.-.,        Tii  -!••  i  -i  o  Louis  the 

it  he  had  been  legitimate,  the  right  of  representa-  Debonair, 
tion  was  not  at  all  established  during  these  ages  ;  AD"  814* 
indeed,  the  general  prejudice  seems  to  have  inclined  against 
it.     Bernard,  therefore,  kept  only  the  kingdom  of  Italy,  which 
had  been  transferred  to  his  father  ;  while  Louis,  the  younger 
son  of  Charlemagne,  inherited  the  empire.3     But,  in  a  short 
time,  Bernard,  having  attempted  a  rebellion  against 
his  uncle,  was  sentenced  to  lose  his  eyes,  which 
occasioned  his  death  —  a  cruelty  more  agreeable  to  the  pre- 
vailing tone  of  manners  than  to  the  character  of  Louis,  who 
bitterly  reproached  himself  for  the  severity  he  had  been  per- 
suaded to  use. 

Under  this  prince,  called  by  the  Italians  the  Pious,  and 
by  the  French  the  Debonair,  or  Good-natured,4  the  mighty 

1  The  Life  of  Charlemagne,  by  Gaillard,  the  theories  of  his  own.     M.  Guizot  asks 

without  being  made  perhaps  so  interest-  whether  the  nation  was  left  in  the  same 

ing  as  it  ought  to  have  been,  presents  an  state   in  which   the  emperor   found   it. 

adequate  view  both  of  his   actions  and  Nothing  fell  with  him,  he  remarks,  but 

character.   Schmidt,  Hist,  des  Allemauds,  the  central  government,  which  could  only 

tome  ii.,  appears  to  me  a  superior  writer,  have  been  preserved  by  a  series  of  men 

An  exception  to  the  general  suffrage  like  himself.  (Essais  sur  l'Hist.  de 
of  historians  in  favor  of  Charlemagne  is  France,  pp.  276-294;  Hist,  de  la  Civiliaa- 
made  by  Sismondi.  He  seems  to  consider  tion  en  France,  Lecon  ii.  p.  39.)  Some, 
him  as  having  produced  no  permanent  indeed,  of  his  institutions  cannot  be  said 
effect;  the  empire,  within  half  a  century,  to  have  long  survived  him;  but  this 
having  been  dismembered,  and  relapsing  again  must  be  chiefly  attributed  to  the 
into  the  merest  weakness  :  —  "  Tellemeut  weakness  of  his  successors.  No  one  man 
la  grandeur  acquise  par  les  armes  est  of  more  than  common  ability  arcae  in 
troinpeuse,  quand  elle  ne  se  donne  pour  the  Carlovingian  dynasty  after  himself, 
appuiaucune  institution  bienfaisante;  et  a  fact  very  disadvantageous  to  the  per- 
tellement  le  regne  d'un  grand  roi  demeure  manence  of  his  policy,  aud  perhaps  rather 
sterile,  quand  il  ne  fonde  pas  la  liberie  surprising:  though  it  is  a  theory  of  Si- 
de ses  concitoyens."  (Vol.  iii.  p.  97.)  mondi  that  royal  families  naturally  dwin- 
But  certainly  some  of  Charlemagne's  in-  die  into  imbecility,  especially  in  a  semi- 
stitutions  were  likely  to  prove  beneficial  barbarous  condition  of  society. 
if  they  could  have  been  maintained,  such  2  a  contemporary  author,  Thegan,  ap 
as  the  Scabiui  and  the  Missi  Dominici.  Muratori,  a.d.  810,  asserts  that  Bernard 
And  when  Sismondi  hints  that  Charle-  was  born  of  a  concubine.  I  do  not  know 
magne  ought  to  have  given  a  charte  con-  why  modern  historians  represent  it  other- 
stitutionnc/le,  it  is  difficult  not  to  smile  at  wise, 
such  a  proof  of  his  inclination  to  judge  3  [Note  XI.] 
past  times  by  a  standard  borrowed  from  *  These  names,  as  a  French  writer  ob 


28  HIS   MISFORTUNES   AMD  ERRORS.     Chap.  1    1'akt  x 

structure  of  his  father's  power  began  rapidly  to  decay.  I  do 
not  know  that  Louis  deserves  so  much  contempt  as  he  has 
undergone  ;  but  historians  have  in  general  more  indulgence 
for  splendid  crimes  than  for  the  weaknesses  of  virtue.  There 
was  no  defect  in  Louis's  understanding  or  courage  ;  he  was 
accomplished  in  martial  exercises,  and  in  all  the  learning 
which  an  education,  excellent  for  that  age,  could  supply.  No 
one  was  ever  more  anxious  to  reform  the  abuses  of  adminis- 
tration ;  and  whoever  compares  his  capitularies  with  those  of 
Charlemagne  will  perceive  that,  as  a  legislator,  he  was  even 
superior  to  his  father.  The  fault  lay  entirely  in  his  heart ; 
and  this  fault  was  nothing  but  a  temper  too  soft  and  a  con- 
science too  strict.1  It  is  not  wonderful  that  the  empire  should 
have  been  speedily  dissolved  ;  a  succession  of  such  men  as 
Charles  Martel,  Pepin,  and  Charlemagne,  could  alone  have 
preserved  its  integrity ;  but  the  misfortunes  of  Louis  and  his 
people  were  immediately  owing  to  the  following  errors  of  his 
conduct. 

Soon  after  his  accession  Louis  thought  fit  to  associate  his 

eldest  son,  Lothaire,  to  the  empire,  and  to  confer 
tunes  and  the  provinces  of  Bavaria  and  Aquitaine,  as  sub- 
errors,  ordinate  kingdoms,  upon   the  two  younger,  Louis 

and  Pepin.  The  step  was,  in  appearance,  conform- 
able to  his  lather's  policy,  who  had  acted  towards  himself  in 
a  similar  manner.  But  such  measures  are  not  subject  to 
general  rules,  and  exact  a  careful  regard  to  characters  and 
circumstances.  The  principle,  however,  which  regulated  this 
division  was  learned  from  Charlemagne,  and  could  alone,  if 
strictly  pursued,  have  given  unity  and  permanence  to  the  em 
pire.  The  elder  brother  was  to  preserve  his  superiority  over 
the  others,  so  that  they  should  neither  make  peace  nor  war, 
nor  even  give  answer  to  ambassadors,  without  his  consent. 
Upon  the  death  of  either  no  further  partition  was  to  be  made ; 
but  whichever  of  his  children  might  become  the  popular 
choice  was  to  inherit  the  whole  kingdom,  under  the  same  su- 

Berves,  meant  the  same  thinj,.     Piks  had,  '  Schmidt,  Hist,  des   Allemands,   torn, 

even   in  good  Latin,  the  sense  of  ?nilis,  ii..   has   done    more  justice   than    othei 

meek,   forbearing,  or   what   the    French  historians    to    Louis's  character.      Vais- 

call    dibonnaire.      Synonyines    de   Hou-  sette  attests  the  goodness  of  his  govern- 

band,  torn.  i.  p.  2">7.     Onr  English  word  ment  in  Aquitaine,  which  he  held  as  a 

debonair  is    hardly    used    in    thu   same  pnliordiuate  kingdom  during  his  father's 

sense,  if  indeed  it  can   be  called  an  Eng-  life.     If  extended  from   the  Loire  to  the 

lish  word;  but  I  have  not  altered  Lou-  Ebro,   so  that   the  trust    was    uot  con- 

is's  appellation,  by   which  he  is  so  well  temptible. — Hist,  de  Languedoc,  torn,  i 

known  p   476 


Fkakck.  PARTITION   OF   THE  EMPIRE.  29 

periority  of  the  head  of  the  family.1  This  compact  was,  from 
the  beginning,  disliked  by  the  younger  brothers  ;  and  an  event, 
upon  which  Louis  does  not  seem  to  have  calculated,  soon  dis- 
gusted his  colleague  Lothaire.  Judith  of  Bavaria,  the  emper- 
or's second  wife,  an  ambitious  woman,  bore  him  a  sen,  by 
name  Charles,  whom  both  parents  were  naturally  anxious  to 
place  on  an  equal  footing  with  his  brothers.  But  this  could 
only  be  done  at  the  expense  of  Lothaire,  who  was  ill  disposed 
to  see  his  empire  still  further  dismembered  for  this  child  of  a 
second  bed.  Louis  passed  his  life  in  a  struggle  with  three 
undutiful  sons,  who  abused  his  paternal  kindness  by  constant 
rebellions. 

These  were  rendered  more  formidable  by  the  concurrence 
of  a  different  class  of  enemies,  whom  it  had  been  another  er- 
ror of  the  emperor  to  provoke.     Charlemagne  had  assumed  a 
thorough  control  and  supremacy  over  the  clergy ;  and  his  son 
was  perhaps  still  more  vigilant  in  chastising  their  irregulari- 
ties,  and   reforming   their  rules   of  discipline.     But    to  this, 
which  they  had  been  compelled  to  bear  at  the  hands  of  the 
first,  it  was   not  equally  easy  for  the  second    to  obtain  their 
submission.     Louis   therefore  drew  on  himself  the  inveterate 
enmity  of  men  who  united  with  the  turbulence  of  martial  no- 
bles a  skill  in  managing  those  engines  of  offence  which  were 
peculiar  to  their  order,  and  to  which  the  implicit  devotion  of 
his  character  laid  him  very  open.      Yet,  after  many  vici.--i- 
tudes  of  fortune,  and  many  days  of  ignominy,  his   A.  D.  840. 
wishes    were    eventually  accomplished.      Charles,   partition  of 
his    youngest   son,   surnamed    the   Bald,  obtained,    fche  emPire 
upon  his  death,  most  part  of  France,  while   Ger-   A'  D"  847- 
many  fell  to  the  share  of  Louis,  and  the  rest  of    bjs°sons, 
the  imperial  dominions,  with  the  title,  to  the  eldest,   Lothaire, 

t       i     •  mi  •  •   •  i  1l      p  Louis,  and 

Lothaire.  1  his  partition  was  the  result  ot  a  san-  chariea  the 
guinary,  though  short,  contest ;  and  it  gave  a  fatal  Bald- 
blow  to  the  empire  of  the  Franks.  For  the  treaty  of  Ver- 
dun, in  843,  abrogated  the  sovereignty  that  had  been  attached 
to  the  eldest  brother  and  to  the  imperial  name  in  former  par- 
titions :  each  held  his  respective  kingdom  as  an  independent 
right.2     This  is  the  epoch  of  a  final  separation  between  the 

1  Baluzii  Capitularia,  torn.  i.  p.  575.  the  subsequent  conduct  of  the  brothers 

2Baluzii   Capitularia,    torn.   ii.    p.  42  ;  and  their  family  justifies  the  construction 

Velly,  tome  ii.,  p.  75.     The  expressions  of  Velly,  which  I  have  followed. 

of  this  treaty  are  perhaps  e  :uivocal ;  but 


tf<) 


ITS  DISMEMBERMENT. 


Chap.  I.  Pa.rt  1 


French  and  German  members  of  the  empire.     Its  millenary 
was  celebrated  by  some  of  the  latter  nation  in  1843.1 

The  subsequent  partitions  made  among  the  children  of 
these  brothers  are  of  too  rapid  succession  to  be 
here  related.  In  about  forty  years  the  empire  was 
nearly  reunited  under  Charles  the  Fat,  son  of 
Louis  of  Germany;  but  his  short  and  inglorious 
reign  ended  in  his  deposition.  From  this  time  the 
possession  of  Italy  was  contested  among  her  na- 
tive princes  ;  Germany  fell  at  first  to  an  illegitimate 
descendant  of  Charlemagne,  and  in  a  short  time 
was  entirely  lost  by  his  family  ;  two  kingdoms,  af- 
terwards united,  were  formed  by  usurpers  out  of 
what  was  then  called  Burgundy,  and  comprised  the  provinces 
between  the  Rhone  and  the  Alps,  with  Franche  Comte,  and 
great  part  of  Switzerland.2  In  France  the  Carlovingian 
kings  continued  for  another  century ;  but  their  line  was  inter- 
rupted two  or  three  times  by  the  election  or  usur- 
pation of  a  powerful  family,  the  counts  of  Paris 
and  Orleans,  who  ended,  like  the  old  mayors  of 
the  palace,  in  dispersing  the  phantoms  of  royalty 
they   had  professed    to  serve.3     Hugh  Capet,  the 


Decline  of 
the  Carlo- 
vingian 
family. 
Charles  the 
F;it,  em- 
peror, 881. 
King  of 
Prance,  885. 
Deposed, 
887. 

Dismember- 
ment of  the 
empire. 


Kings  of 
France. 
Eudes,  887. 
Charles  the 
Simple,  898 
Robert? 
922. 


!The  partition,  which  the  treaty  of 
Verdun  confirmed,  had  been  made  by 
commissioners  specially  appointed  in  the 
preceding  year.  "  Le  nombre  total  des 
commissaires  fut  porte  a  trois  cents;  ils 
se  distribuerent  toute  la  surface  de  l"em- 
pire,  qu'ils  s'engagerentaparcouriravaut 
le  mois  d'  aout  de  I'annee  suivante  :  cet 
immense  travail  etoit  en  effet  alors  ueces- 
saire  pour  se  procurer  les  connoissances 
qu'on  obtient aujourd'hui  en  uu  instant, 
par  1  inspection  d'une  carte  geograph- 
ique:  malheureusement  on  ecrivoit  a 
cette  epoque  aussi  peu  qu'on  lisoit.  Le 
rapport  des  commissaires  ne  fut  point 
mis  j.ar  ecrit,  ou  point  depose  dans  les 
archives.  S"il  nous  avoit  etc  conserve, 
ce  seroit  le  plus  curieux  de  tous  les  mon- 
umens  su:  I'etat  de  l'Europe  au  moyen 
ige.''  (Sismondi,  Hist,  des  Franc  iii.  76.) 
For  this  he  quotes  Nithard,  a  contem- 
porary historian. 

In  the  division  made  on  this  occasion 
the  kingdom  of  France,  which  fell  to 
Charles  the  Bald,  had  for  its  eastern 
boundary,  the  Meuse,  the  Saone,  and  the 
Rhone  ;  which,  nevertheless,  can  only  be 
understood  of  the  Upper  Meuse,  since 
Brabant  was  certainly  not  comprised  in 
It.     Lothaire,  the  elder  brother,   besides 


Italy,  had  a  kingdom  called  Lorraine, 
from  his  name  (Lotharingia),  extending 
from  the  mouth  of  the  Rhine  to  Provence, 
bounded  by  that  river  on  one  frontier,  by 
France  on  the  other.  Louis  took  all  be- 
yond the  Rhine,  and  was  usually  styled 
The  Germanic. 

2 These  kingdoms  were  denominated 
Provence  and  Transjnrane  Burgundy. 
The  latter  was  very  small,  com  prising 
only  part  of  Switzerland;  but  its  second 
sovereign,  Rodolph  II.,  acquired  by 
treaty  almost  the  whole  of  the  former; 
and  the  two  united  were  called  the  king- 
dom of  Aries.  This  lasted  from  933  to 
1032,  when  Rodolph  III.  bequeathed  his 
dominions  to  the  emperor  Conrad  II. — 
Art  de  verifier  les  Dates,  torn.  ii.  p 
427-432. 

-The  family  of  Capet  is  generally  aa- 
mitted  to  possess  the  most  ancient  pedi- 
gree of  any  sovereign  line  in  Europe.  Its 
succession  through  males  is  unequivo- 
cally deduced  from  Robert  the  Brave, 
made  governor  of  Anjou  in  864,  and 
father  of  Eudes  king  of  France,  and  of 
Robert,  who  was  chosen  by  a  party  in 
922.  though,  as  Charles  the  Simple  was 
still   acknowledged  in  some  provinces,  it 


Franck.  STATE   OF   THE  PEOPLE.  3] 

representative   of  this  house    upon   the   death    of    Ralph,  923 
Louis   V.,  placed  himself  upon  the   throne ;   thus   9^ms  IY' 
founding   the    third   and  ino.-t   permanent   race  of    Lothaire, 
French  sovereigns.     Before  this  happened,  the  de-   Louis  v. 
Bcendants  of  Charlemagne  had  sunk  into  insig;nifi-   ?„86-  x    . 

,  •        t    1.,  ?  ,.   -r,  °     ,         Counts  of 

cance,  and  retained  little  more  or  France  than  the    Paris, 
city  of  Laon.     The  rest  of  the  kingdom  had  been  seized  by 
the   powerful   noble?,  who,  with  the   nominal  fidelity  of  the 
feudal  system,  maintained  its  practical  independence  and  re- 
bellious spirit.1 

These  were  times  of  great  misery  to  the  people,  and  the 
worst,  perhaps,  that  Europe  has  ever  known.  Even  under 
Charlemagne,  we  have  abundant  proofs  of  the  ca-  state  of  the 
lamities  which  the  people  suffered.  The  light  Pe°PIe- 
which  shone  around  him  was  that  of  a  consuming  fire.  The 
free  proprietors  who  had  once  considered  themselves  as  only 
called  upon  to  resist  foreign  invasion,  were  harassed  by  end- 
less expeditions,  and  dragged  away  to  the  Baltic  Sea,  or  the 
banks  of  the  Drave.  Many  of  them,  as  we  learn  from  his 
Capitularies,  became  ecclesiastics  to  avoid  military  conscrip- 
tion.2 But  far  worse  must  have  been  their  state  under  the 
lax  government  of  succeeding  times,  when  the  dukes  and 
counts,  no  longer  checked  by  the  vigorous  administration  of 
Charlemagne,  were  at  liberty  to  play  the  tyrants  in  their  sev- 
eral territories,  of*  which  they  now  became  almost  the  sover- 
eigns. The  poorer  landholders  accordingly  were  forced  to 
bow  their  necks  to  the  yoke ;  and.  either  by  compulsion  or 
through  hope  of  being  better  protected,  submitted  their  inde- 
pendent patrimonies  to  the  feudal  tenure. 

is   uncertain  whether    he  ought   to  be  independent  and  bound  by  no  feudal  tie 

counted  in  the  royal  list  It  is,  more-  (Lettres  sur  1'Hist.  de  France.  Lett.  IX.) 
over,  highly  probable   that   Robert   the        2  Capitularia,  a.  d.  805.     Whoever  pos 

Brave  was    descended,  equally  through  sessed    three  mansi  of  alodial    propertj 

males,  from  St.  Arnoul,  who  died  in  640,  was  called  upon  for  personal  service.  01 

and  consequently    nearly   allied   to  the  at  least  to  furnish  a  substitute.    Nigellua, 

Carlovingian    family,    who    derive   their  author  of  a   poetical   Life   of  Louis   I., 

pedigree    from     the    same     head.  —  See  seems  to   implicate  Charlemagne  himself 

Preuves  de  la  Genealogie  de  Hughes  Ca-  in  some  of  the  oppressions  of  his  reign. 

pet,  in  l'Art  de  verifier  les  Dates,  torn.  i.  It  was  the  first  care  of  the  former  to  re- 

P-  566.  dress -those  who  had  been  injured  in  his 

J[  Note  XII.]  father's  time.  —  Recueil  des   Historiens. 

At  the  close  of  the  ninth  century  there  tome  vi.     N.B.  I  quote  by  this   title  the 

were  twenty-nine  hereditary   fiefs  of  the  great   collection    of    French    historians, 

crown.     At  the  accession  of  Hugh  Capet,  charters  and   other  documents  illustra- 

ln  £S7,  they  had  increased  to   fifty-five,  five  of  the  middle  ages,  more  commonly 

(Guizot,  Civilis  en    France,    Lec,on    24.)  known  by  the   name   of  its  first  editor. 

Thierry    maintains   that    those   between  the  Benedictine  Bouquet.    But  aa  several 

the  Loire  and  the  Pyrenees  were  strictly  learned  men  of  that  order  were  sucees 


32  THE  SARACEN b.  Chap.  1.  Pakt  I 

Hut  evils  still  more  terrible  than  these  political  abuser 
were  the  lot  of  those  nations  who  had  been  subject  to  Charle- 
magne. They,  indeed,  may  appear  to  us  little  better  than 
ferocious  barbarians;  but  they  were  exposed  to  the  assaults 
of  tribes-,  in  comparison  of  whom  they  must  be  deemed  humane 
and  polished.  Each  frontier  of  the  empire  had  to  dread  the 
attack  of  an   enemy.     The  coasts  of  Italy  were 

The  Saracens.  ,.         ,,  ,  i     1         Ai         o  c     \  r  • 

continually  alarmed  by  the  oaracens  or  Africa, 
who  possessed  themselves  of  Sicily  and  Sardinia,  and  became 
masters  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea.1  Though  the  Greek 
dominions  in  the  south  of  Italy  were  chiefly  exposed 
to  them,  they  twice  insulted  and  ravaged  the  terri- 
tory of  Rome  ;  nor  was  there  any  security  even  in  the  neigh- 
borhood of  the  maritime  Alps,  where,  early  in  the  tenth 
century,  they  settled  a  piratical  colony.2 

Much  more  formidable  were  the  foes  by  whom  Germany 
The  was  assailed.     The  Sclavonians,  a  widely  extended 

Hungarians,  people,  whose  language  is  still  spoken  upon  half 
the  surface  of  Europe,  had  occupied  the  countries  of  Bohemia. 
Poland,  and  Pannonia,3  on  the  eastern  confines  of  the  empire, 
and  from  the  time  of  Charlemagne  acknowledged  its  superi- 
ority. But  at  the  end  of  the  ninth  century,  a  Tartarian 
tribe,  the  Hungarians,  overspreading  that  country  which 
since  has  borne  their  name,  and  moving  forward  like  a  vast 
wave,  brought  a  dreadful  reverse  upon  Germany.  Their 
numbers  were  great,  their  ferocity  untamed.  They  fought 
with  light  cavalry  and  light  armor,  trusting  to  their  showers 
of  arrows,  against  which  the  swords  and  lances  of  the  Euro- 
pean armies  could  not  avail.  The  memory  of  Attila  was 
renewed  in  the  devastations  of  these  savages,  who,  if  they 
were  not  his  compatriots,  resembled  them  both  in  their  coun- 

Bively  concerned  in  this   work,  not  one  Monaco,  were  extirpated  by  a  count  of 

half  of  which  has  yet  been  published,  it  Provence  in  972.     But  they  had  estab- 

seenied  better  to  follow  its  own  title-page,  lished  themselves  more  inland  than  Fras- 

i  These  African  Saracens  belonged   to  siiieto.    Creeping  up  the  line  of  the  Alps, 

the  Aglabites,  a  dynasty  that  reigned  at  they  took  possession  of  St.  Maurice,  in 

funis  for  the  whole  of  the  ninth  century,  the  Valais.  from  which  the  feeble  kings  of 

after  throwing  off  the  yoke  of  the  Abbas-  Transjurane  Burgundy  could  net  dislodge 

rite    Khalifa.      They    were    overthrown  them. 

themselves  in  the  next  age  by  the  Fall-  3  I  am  sensible  of  the  awkward  effect 

mites.    Sicily  was  first  invaded  in  827:  of  introducing  this  name  from    a  more 

hut   the  city  of  Syracuse  was  only  re-  ancient  geography,  but  it  saves  a  circum- 

dhiced  in  878.  locution   still    more    awkward.     Austria 

8  M ura tori,  Annali  d'ltalia,   ad.  aim.  would  convey  an  imperfect  idea,  and  the 

900.  et  alibi.     These  Saracens  of  Frassi-  Austrian  dominions  could  not  be  named 

net<  ,  supposed  to  be  between  Nice  and  without  a  tremendous  anachronism. 


France.  THE  HUNGARIANS.  3S 

tenances  and  customs.     All  Italy,  all  Germany,  and  the  south 
of    France    felt    this    scourge ; *    till    Henry    the 
Fowler,  and  Otho  the  Great,  drove  them  back  by 
successive  victories  within  their  own  limits,  where,  in  a  short 
time,  they   learned   peaceful   arts,  adopted   the   religion   and 
followed  the  policy  of  Christendom. 

If  any  enemies  could  be  more  destructive  than  these  Hun- 
garians, they  were  the  pirates  of  the  north,  known  The 
commonly  by  the  name  of  Normans.  The  love  of  Normans. 
a  predatory  life  seems  to  have  attracted  adventurers  of 
different  nations  to  the  Scandinavian  seas,  from  whence  they 
infested,  not  only  by  maritime  piracy,  but  continual  invasions, 
the  northern  coasts  both  of  France  and  Germany.  The 
causes  of  their  sudden  appearance  are  inexplicable,  or  at 
least  could  only  be  sought  in  the  ancient  traditions  of  Scandi- 
navia. For,  undoubtedly,  the  coasts  of  France  and  England 
were  as  little  protected  from  depredations  under  the  Mero- 
vingian kings,  and  those  of  the  Heptarchy,  as  in  subsequent 
times.  Yet  only  one  instance  of  an  attack  from  this  side  is 
recorded,  and  that  before  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century,2  till 
the  age  of  Charlemagne.  In  787  the  Danes,  as  we  call  those 
northern  plunderers,  began  to  infest  England,  which  lay  most 
immediately  open  to  their  incursions.  Soon  afterwards  they 
ravaged  the  coasts  of  France.  Charlemagne  repulsed  them 
by  means  of  his  fleets ;  yet  they  pillaged  a  few  places  during 
his  reign.  It  is  said  that,  perceiving  one  day,  from  a  port  in 
the  Mediterranean,  some  Norman  vessels,  which  had  pene- 
trated into  that  sea,  he  shed  tears,  in  anticipation  of  the 
miseries  which  awaited  his  empire.3  In  Louis's  reign  their 
depredations  upon  the  coast  were  more  incessant,4  but  they 

1  In  924  they  overran  Languedoc.  2  Greg.  Turon.  1.  iii.  c.  3. 
Rayinond-Pons,  count  of  Toulouse,  cut  3  ia  the  ninth  century  the  Norman 
their  army  to  pieces;  but  they  had  pre-  pirates  not  only  ravaged  the  Balearic 
Tiously.committed  such  ravages,  that  the  isles,  and  nearer  coasts  of  the  Mediterra- 
bishops  of  that  province,  writing  soon  nean,  but  even  Greece. — De  Marca,  Mar- 
afterwards  to  Pope  John  X.,  assert  that  ca  Hispanica,  p.  327. 
scarcely  any  eminent  ecclesiastics,  out  4  Nigellus,  the  poetical  biographer  of 
of  a  great  number,  were  left  alive.  —  Louis,  gives  the  following  description  of 
Hist,  de  Languedoc,  tome  ii.  p.  60.    They  the  Normans  :  — 

penetrated  into  Guienne,  as  late  as  951.  Nort    quoque    Francisco    dicuntur    no- 
--Flodoardi   Chronicon,  in   Recueil  des  mine  manni. 
Historiens,  tome  viii.     In  Italy  they  in-  Veloces,  agiles,  armigerique  nimis: 
spired  such  terror  that  a  mass  was  com-  Ipse  quidem  populus  late  pernotus  Im- 
posed expressly  deprecating  this  calam-  betur, 

ity  :  Ab  Ungarorum  nos  defendas  jaculis  !  Liutre  dapes  quaerit,  incolitatque  mare. 

In  937  they  ravaged  the  country  as  far  Pulcher  adest  facie,  vultuque  statuque 

as    Benevento   and   Capua.  —  Muratori,  decorus.  —  1.  iv. 
Ann.  d'ltalia. 

VOL.  I.  — m.  3 


34  THE  NORMANS.  Chap.  I    1'akt  1 

did  not  penetrate  into  the  inland  country  till  that  of  Charles. 
the  Bald.  The  wars  between  that  prince  and  his  family, 
which  exhausted  Franc*'  of  her  noblest  blood,  the  insubordi- 
nation of  the  provincial  governors,  even  the  instigation  of 
some  of  Charles's  enemies,  laid  all  open  to  their  inroads. 
They  adopted  an  uniform  plan  of  warfare  both  in  Franco  and 
England ;  sailing  up  navigable  rivers  in  their  vessels  of 
small  burden,  and  fortifying  the  islands  which  they  occasion- 
ally found,  they  made  these  intrenchments  at  once  an  asylum 
for  their  women  and  children,  a  repository  for  their  plunder, 
and  a  place  of  retreat  from  superior  force.  After  pillaging  a 
town  they  retired  to  these  strongholds  or  to  their  ships  ;  and 
it  was  not  till  872  that  they  ventured  to  keep  possession  of 
Angers,  which,  however,  they  were  compelled  to  evacuate. 
Sixteen  years  afterwards  they  laid  siege  to  Paris,  and  com- 
mitted the  most  ruinous  devastations  on  the  neighboring 
country.  As  these  Normans  were  unchecked  by  religious 
awe,  the  rich  monasteries,  which  had  stood  harmless  amidst 
the  havoc  of  Christian  war,  were  overwhelmed  in  the  storm. 
Perhaps  they  may  have  endured  some  irrecoverable  losses  of 
ancient  learning ;  but  their  complaints  are  of  monuments 
disfigured,  bones  of  saints  and  kings  dispersed,  treasures 
carried  away.  St.  Denis  redeemed  its  abbot  from  captivity 
with  six  hundred  and  eighty-five  pounds  of  gold.  All  the 
chief  abbeys  were  stripped  about  the  same  time,  either  by  the 
enemy,  or  for  contributions  to  the  public  necessity.  So 
impoverished  was  the  kingdom,  that  in  8 GO  Charles  the  Bald 
had  great  difficulty  in  collecting  three  thousand  pounds  of 
silver  to  subsidize  a  body  of  Normans  against  their  country- 
men. The  kings  of  France,  too  feeble  to  prevent  or  repel 
these  invaders,  had  recourse  to  the  palliative  of  buying  peace 
at  their  hands,  or  rather  precarious  armistices,  to  which 
reviving  thirst  of  plunder  soon  put  an  end.  At  length 
Charles  the  Simple,  in  918,  ceded  a  great  province,  which 
they  had  already  partly  occupied,  partly  rendered  desolate, 
and  which  has  derived  from  them  the  name  of  Normandy. 
Ignominious  as  this  appears,  it  proved  no  impolitic  step. 
Rollo,  the  Norman  chief,  witli  all  his  subjects,  became 
Christians  and   Frenchmen  ;  and  the  kingdom  was  at  once 


He  goes   on   to  toll   us   that   they  wor-     of  name,  or  of  attributes,  that  deceived 
ihipped   Neptune— Was   it  a  similarity     him' 


Frajjce.  ACCESSION  OF  HUGH  CAPET.  35 

relieved  from  a  terrible  enemy,  and  strengthened  by  a  race 
of  hardy  colonists.1 

The  accession  of  Hugh  Capet  had  not  the  immediate  effect 
of  restoring  the  royal  authority  over  France.  His  Accession  of 
jwn  very  extensive  fief  was  now,  indeed,  united  to  Hugh  Capet, 
the  crown  ;  but  a  few  great  vassals  occupied  the  A'D  98' 
remainder  of  the  kingdom.  Six  of  these  obtained,  at  a  sub- 
sequent time,  the  exclusive  appellation  of  peers  of  France, — 
the  count  of  Flanders,  whose  fief  stretched  from  stateof 
the  Scheldt  to  the  Somme  ;  the  count  of  Cham-  France  at 
pagne  ;  the  duke  of  Normandy,  to  whom  Britany  that  time' 
did  homage  ;  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  on  whom  the  count  of 
Nivernois  seems  to  have  depended ;  the  duke  of  Aquitaine, 
whose  territory,  though  less  than  the  ancient  kingdom  of  that 
name,  comprehended  Poitou,  Limousin,  and  most  of  Guienne, 
with  the  feudal  superiority  over  the  Angoumois,  and  some 
other  central  districts  ;  and  lastly  the  count  of  Toulouse,  who 
possessed  Languedoc,  with  the  small  countries  of  Quercy  and 
Rouergue,  and  the  superiority  over  Auvergne.'2  Besides 
these  six,  the  duke  of  Gascony,  not  long  afterwards  united 
with  Aquitaine,  the  counts  of  Anjou,  Ponthieu,  and  Verman- 
dois,  the  viscount  of  Bourges,  the  lords  of  Bourbon  and 
Coucy,  with  one  or  two  other  vassals,  held  immediately  of  the 
last  Carlo vingian  kings.3  This  was  the  aristocracy,  of  which 
Hugh  Capet  usurped  the  direction  ;  for  the  suffrage  of  no 
general  assembly  gave  a  sanction  to  his  title.  On  the  death 
of  Louis  V.  he  took  advantage  of  the  absence  of  Charles,  duke 
of  Lorraine,  who,  as  the  deceased  king's  uncle,  was  nearest 
heir,  and  procured  his  own  consecration  at  Rheims.  At  first 
he  was  by  no  means  acknowledged  in  the  kingdom  ;  but  his 
contest  with  Charles  proving  successful,  the  chief  vassals 
ultimately  gave  at  least  a  tacit  consent  to  the  usurpation,  and 
permitted  the  royal  name  to  descend  undisputed  upon  his 
posterity.4     But  this  was  almost  the  sole  attribute  of  sover- 

i  An  exceedingly  good  sketch  of  these  then  got  possession  of  it;  but  early  in 

Norman  incursions,  and  of  the  political  the  twelfth  century  the  counts  of  Au- 

gituation  of  France  during  that  period,  vergne  again  did  homage  to  Guienne.     It 

may  he   found  in    two   Memoirs   by  M.  is  very  difficult  to  follow  the  history  of 

Bonamy,  Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscript.  these  fiefs. 

tomes  xv.  and  xvii.    These  I  have  chiefly  3  The  immediacy  of  vassals  in  times  so 

followed  in  the  text.     [Note  XIII.]  ancient  is  open  to  much  controversy.     1 

2  Auvergne  changed  its  feudal  superior  have  followed  the  authority  of  those  in- 

twice.     It  had  been  subject  to  the  duke  dustrious    Benedictines,    the  editors   of 

of  Aquitaine  till  about  the  middle  of  the  LWrt  de  verifier  les  Dates, 

tenth  century.    The  counts  of  Toulouse  4  The  south  of  France  net  only  to  ok 


36  STATE  OF  FRANCE  AT  THAT  TIME.     Chap.  1.  Pari  1 

eignty  which  the  first  kings  of  the  third  dynasty  enjoyed. 
For  a  long  period  before  and  after  the  accession  of  that  family 
France  has,  properly  speaking,  no  national  history.  The 
character  or  fortune  of  those  who  were  called  its  kings  were 
little  more  important  to  the  majority  of  the  nation  than  those 
of  foreign  princes.  Undoubtedly,  the  degree  of  influence 
Robert,  which  they  exercised  with  respect  to  the  vassals 

a.d.  996.  0f  tne  crown  varied  according  to  their  power  and 
their  proximity.  Over  Gruienne  and  Toulouse  the  first  four 
Capets  had  very  little  authority ;  nor  do  they  seem  to  have 
Henry  i.  ever  received  assistance  from  them  either  in  civil 
p'biii^i1'  or  national  wars.1  With  provinces  nearer  to  their 
a.d.  1060.  own  domains,  such  as  Normandy  and  Flanders, 
they  were  frequently  engaged  in  alliance  or  hostility  ;  but 
each  seemed  rather  to  proceed  from  the  policy  of  independent 
states  than  from  the  relation  of  a  sovereign  towards  his 
subjects.2 

It  should  be  remembered  that,  when  the  fiefs  of  Paris  and 
Orleans  are  said  to  have  been  reunited  by  Hugh  Capet  to 
the  crown,  little  more  is  understood  than  the  feudal  superi- 
ority over  the  vassals  of  these  provinces.  As  the  kingdom 
of  Charlemagne's  posterity  was  split  into  a  number  of  great 
fiefs,  so  each  of  these    contained    many  barons,   possessing 

no  part  in  Hugh's  elevation,  but  long  of  Gulielinus  Pictaviensis  be  considered 
refused  to  pay  him  any  obedience,  or  as  matter  of  fact,  and  not  rather  as  a 
rather  to  acknowledge  his  title,  for  obe-  rhetorical  flourish.  He  tells  us  that  a 
dience  was  wholly  out  of  the  question,  vast  army  was  collected  by  Henry  I. 
The  style  of  charters  ran,  instead  of  the  against  the  duke  of  Normandy  :  Bur- 
king's  name,  Deo  regnante,  rege  expec-  gundium,  Arverniam,  atque  Vasconiam 
tante,  or  absente  rege  terreno.  He  forced  properare  videres  horribiles  ferro  ;  iminc 
Guienne  to  submit  about  990.  But  in  vires  tanti  regni  quantum  in  climate 
Limousin  they  continued  to  acknowledge  quatuor  niuudi  patent  cunctas. — Recueil 
the  sons  of  Charles  of  Lorraine  till  1009.  des  Historiens,  t.  xi.  p.  83.  But  we  have 
—  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Lang.  t.  ii.  p.  120,  the  roll  of  the  army  which  Louis  VI.  led 
150.  Before  this  Toulouse  had  refused  against  the  emperor  Henry  V.,  a.d.  1120. 
to  recognize  Eudes  and  Raoul,  two  kings  in  a  national  war:  and  it  was  entirely 
of  France  who  were  not  of  the  Carlovin-  composed  of  troops  from  Champagne,  the 
gian  family,  and  even  hesitated  about  Isle  of  France,  the  Orleannois,  and  other 
Louis  IV  and  Lothaire,  who  had  an  provinces  north  of  the  Loire. — Velly, 
hereditary  right.  —  Idem.  t.  iii.  p.  62.     Yet  this  was  a  sort  of  jon- 

These  proofs  of  Hugh  Capet's  usurpa-  vocation  of  the  ban ;  Ilex  ut  eum  tota 
tion  seem  not  to  be  materially  invalidated  Francis  sequatur,  invitat.  Even  so  late 
by  a  dissertation  in  the  50th  volume  of  as  the  reign  of  I'hilip  Augustus,  in  a 
the  Academy  of  Inscriptions,  p.  553.  It  list  of  the  knights  bannerets  of  France, 
is  not  of  course  to  be  denied  that  the  though  those  of  Britain- ,  Flanders. Cham- 
northern  parts  of  France  acquiesced  in  pagne,  and  Burgundy,  besides  the  royal 
his  assumption  of  the  royal  title,  if  they  domains,  arc  enumerated,  no  mention  ia 
did  not  give  an  express  ".ensent  to  it.  mule  of  the  provinces  beyond  the  Loire 

l  I  have  not  found  any  authority  for  — Du  Chesne,  Script.  Rerum  Oallicarum 

supposing  that  the  provinces  south  of  the  t.  v.  p.  262. 
IiOir«  contributed  their  assistance  to  the        2  [Note  XIV.] 
king  in  war,  unless  the  following  passage 


Fkasce.  LOUIS  VI.  37 

exclusive  immunities  within  their  own  territories,  waging 
war  at  their  pleasure,  administering  justice  to  their  military 
tenants  and  other  subjects,  and  free  from  all  control  beyond 
the  conditions  of  the  feudal  compact.1  At  the  Louis vi. 
accession  of  Louis  VI.  in  1108,  the  cities  of  Paris,  AD- im 
Orleans,  and  Bourges,  with  the  immediately  adjacent  districts, 
formed  the  most  considerable  portion  of  the  royal  domain.  A 
number  of  petty  barons,  with  their  fortified  castles,  inter- 
cepted the  communication  between  these,  and  waged  war 
against  the  king  almost  under  the  walls  of  his  capital.  It  C03t 
Louis  a  great  deal  of  trouble  to  reduce  the  lords  of  Montlhery, 
and  other  places  within  a  few  miles  of  Paris.  Under  this 
prince,  however,  who  had  more  activity  than  his  predecessors, 
the  royal  authority  considerably  revived.  From  his  reign 
we  may  date  the  systematic  rivalry  of  the  French  and 
English  monarchies.  Hostilities  had  several  times  occurred 
between  Philip  I.  and  the  two  Williams  ;  but  the  wars  that 
began  under  Louis  VI.  lasted,  with  no  long  interruption,  for 
three  centuries  and  a  half,  and  form,  indeed,  the  most  leading 
feature  of  French  history  during  the  middle  ages.'2  Of  all 
the  royal  vassals,  the  dukes  of  Normandy  were  the  proudest 
and  most  powerful.  Though  they  h?d  submitted  to  do 
homage,  they  could  not  forget  that  they  came  '-»  originally  by 
force,  and  that  in  real  strength  they  were  fully  equal  to  their 
sovereign.  Nor  had  the  conquest  of  England  any  tendency  to 
diminish  their  pretensions.3 

Louis  VII.  ascended  the  throne  with  better  prospects  than 

i  lu  a  subsequent  chapter  I  shall  illus-  be  understood  of  course   that  these  di- 

trate  at  much  greater  length  the  circuni-  visions   are    not    rigorously   exact;  ami 

ptances   of   the    French   monarchy   with  also  that,  in  every   instance,  owners   ot 

respect  to  its  feudal  vassals.    It  would  be  fiefs  with  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction 

inconvenient  to  anticipate  the  subject  at  had  the  full  possession  of  their  own  terri- 

present,  which  is  rather  of  a  legal  than  tories.  subject   more  or  less  to  their  im- 

narrative  character.  mediate  lord  whether  it  were  the  king  or 

Sismondi  has  given  a  relative  scale  of  another.     The  real  domain  of  Louis  VI. 

the  great  fiefs,  according  to  the  number  was  almost  confined  to  the  five  rowns  — 

of  modern  departments  which  thev  con-  Pari*.    Orleans,    Estampes,    Melun,    and 

tained.    At  the  accession  of  Louis  VI.  the  Uompiegne   (id.  p.  86);  and   to   estates, 

crown  possessed  about  five  departments;  probably  large,  in  their  neighborhood, 

the   count  of  Flanders   held   four;  the  2  Velly,  t.  iii.  p.  40. 

count  of  Vermandois,  two ;  the  count  of  3  The  Norman  historians  maintain  that 

Boulogne,  one  ;  the  count  of  Champagne,  their  dukes  did  not  owe  any  service  to 

six;  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  three;  of  the  king  of  France,  but  only  simple  hoin- 

Nonnandv,    five:  of    BriMnv.    five:  the  Rge,  or,  us  it  was  called,   per  paragium. 

nount  of  Anjou,  three.     Thirty-three  de-  —  Recueil  des  Historiens,  t.  xi.  pref.  p. 

partments  south  of  the  Loire  he  considers  161.     They   certainly   acted    upon    this 

as  hardly  connected  with  the  crown  ;  and  principle  ;  and  the  manner  in  which  they 

twenty -one  were  at  that  time  dependent  first  came  into  the  country  is  not  verv 

on  the  empire.     (Vol   v.  p.  7.)     It  is  to  consistent  with  dependence 


38  PHILIP  AUGUSTUS.  Chap.  I.  Part  I 

LouJa  vit  his  father.  He  had  married  Eleanor,  heiress  of 
a.d.  1137.  the  great  duchy  of  Guienne.  But  this  union, 
which  promised  an  immense  accession  of  strength  to  thr 
crown,  was  rendered  unhappy  by  the  levities  of  that  princess 
Repudiated  by  Louis,  who  felt  rather  as  a  husband  than  a 
king,  Eleanor  immediately  married  Henry  II.  of  England, 
who,  already  inheriting  Normandy  from  his  mother  and 
Anjou  from  his  father,  became  possessed  of  more  than  one 
half  of  France,  and  an  overmatch  for  Louis,  even  if  the  great 
vassals  of  the  crown  had  been  always  ready  to  maintain  its 
supremacy.  One  might  venture,  perhaps,  to  conjecture  that 
the  sceptre  of  France  would  eventually  have  passed  from  the 
Capets  to  the  Plantagenets,  if  the  vexatious  quarrel  with 
Becket  at  one  time,  and  the  successive  rebellions  fomented  by 
Louis  at  a  later  period,  had  not  embarrassed  the  great  talents 
and  ambitious  spirit  of  Henry. 

But  the  scene  quite  changed  when  Philip  Augustus,  son  of 
Philip  Louis  VII.,  came  upon  the  stage.     No  prince  com- 

Augustus,       parable  to  him  in  systematic  ambition  and  military 

11  ftrt 

enterprise  had  reigned  in  France  since  Charle- 
magne. From  his  reign  the  French  monarchy  dates  the  recov- 
ery of  its  lustre.  He  wrested  from  the  count  of  Flanders  the 
Vermandois  (that  part  of  Picardy  which  borders  on  the  Isle 
of  F ranee  and  Champagne *),  and  subsequently,  the  county  of 
Artois.  But  the  most  important  conquests  of  Philip  were 
obtained  against  the  kings  of  England.  Even  Richard  L,  with 
all  his  prowess,  lost  ground  in  struggling  against  an  adver- 
Conquest  of  sarJ  not  ^ess  actrv"e>  and  more  politic,  than  himself. 
Normandy,     But  when  John  not  only  took  possession  of  his 

brother's  dominions,  but  confirmed  his  usurpation 
by  the  murder,  as  was  very  probably  surmised,  of  the  heir. 
Philip,  artfully  taking  advantage  of  the  general  indignation, 
summoned  him  as  his  vassal  to  the  court  of  his  peers.  John 
demanded  a  safe-conduct.  Willingly,  said  Philip  ;  let  him 
come  unmolested.  And  return  ?  inquired  the  English  envoy. 
If  the  judgment  of  his  peers  permit  him,  replied  the  king. 
By  all  the  saints  of  France,  he  exclaimed,  when  further 
pressed,  he  shall  not  return  unless  acquitted.     The  bishop 

l  The  original   counts  of  Vermandois  the  oarl  of  Flanders,  after  her  death  in 

were   descended  from  Bernard,  king  of  1183.     The    principal  towns  of  the  Ver- 

Italy,  grandson    of   Charlemagne  :   but  mandois  are  St.  Quentin  and  Peronne. — 

iheir  fief  passed  by  the  donation  of  Isa-  Art  de  verifier  les  Dates,  t.  ii.  p.  700 
bel,  the  la?t  countess,  to  her  husband, 


t  RANCH. 


louis  vm.  39 


of  Ely  still  remonstrated  that  the  duke  of  Normandy  could 
not  come  without  the  king  of  England  ;  nor  would  the  barons 
of  that  country  permit  their  sovereign  to  run  the  risk  of  death 
or  imprisonment.  What  of  that,  my  lord  bishop  ?  cried 
Philip.  It  is  well  known  that  my  vassal  the  duke  of  Nor- 
mandy acquired  England  by  force.  But  if  a  subject  obtains 
any  accession  of  dignity,  shall  his  paramount  lord  therefore 
lose  his  rights  ?  * 

It  may  be  doubted  whether,  in  thus  citing  John  before  his 
court,  the  king  of  France  did  not  stretch  his  feudal  sovereign- 
ty beyond  its  acknowledged  limits.  Arthur  was  certainly  no 
immediate  vassal  of  the  crown  for  Britany ;  and,  though  he 
had  done  homage  to  'Philip  for  Anjou  and  Maine,  yet  a  sub- 
sequent treaty  had  abrogated  his  investiture,  and  confirmed 
his  uncle  in  the  possession  of  those  provinces.2  But  the 
vigor  of  Philip,  and  the  meanness  of  his  adversary,  cast  a 
shade  over  all  that  might  be  novel  or  irregular  in  these  pro- 
ceedings. John,  not  appearing  at  his  summons,  was  declared 
guilty  of  felony,  and  his  fiefs  confiscated.  The  execution  of 
this  sentence  was  not  intrusted  to  a  dilatory  arm.  Philip 
poured  his  troops  into  Normandy,  and  took  town  after  town, 
while  the  king  of  England,  infatuated  by  his  own  wickedness 
and  cowardice,  made  hardly  an  attempt  at  defence.  In  two 
years  Normandy,  Maine,  and  Anjou  were  irrecoverably  lost. 
Poitou  and  Guienne  resisted  longer ;  but  the  con-  Louis  vm. 
quest  of  the  first  was  completed  by  Louis  VIII.,  AD" 
successor  of  Philip,  and  the  subjection  of  the  second  seemed 
drawing  near,  when  the  arms  of  Louis  were  diverted  to  dif- 
ferent but  scarcely  less  advantageous  objects. 

Tb3  country  of  Languedoc,  subject  to  the  counts  of  Tou- 
louse, had  been  unconnected,  beyond  any  other  part  Affairs  of 
of  France,  with  the  kings  of  the  house  of  Capet.  Lansuedoc- 
Louis  VII.,  having  married  his  sister  to  the  reigning  count, 
and  travelled  himself  through  the  country,  began  to  exercise 
some  degree  of  authority,  chiefly  in  confirming  the  rights  of 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  who  were  vain,  perhaps,  of  this  addition- 
al sanction  to  the  privileges  which  they  already  possessed.3 

i  Mat.  Paris,  p.  238,  edit.  1C84.  trace  of  any  act  of  sovereignty  exercised 

2  The  illegality  of  Philip's  proceedings  by  the  kings  of  France  in  Languedoc 
is  well  argued  by  Mably,  Observations  from  955,  when  Lothaire  confirmed  a 
eur  l'Histoire  de  France,  1.  iii.  c.  6.  charter  of  his  predecessor  Raoul  in  favot 

3  According  to  the  Benedictine  his-  of  the  bishop  of  Puy,  till  the  reign  of 
torians,  Vioh  and  Vaissette,  there  is  no  Louis  VII.  (Hist,  de  Languedoc,  tome  iii 


40  AFFAIRS    OF   LANGUEDOC       Chap.  I.  Fart  ' 

But  the  remoteness  of  their  situation,  with  a  difference  in 
language  and  legal  usages,  still  kept  the  people  of  this  prov- 
ince apart  from  those  of  the  north  of  France. 

About  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  certain  religious 
opinions,  which  it  is  not  easy,  nor,  for  our  present  purpose, 
material  to  define,  hut,  upon  every  supposition,  exceedingly 
adverse  to  those  of  the  church,1  began  to  spread  over  Langue- 
doc  Those  who  imbibed  them  have  borne  the  name  of 
Albigeois,  though  they  were  in  no  degree  peculiar  to  the 
district  of  Albi.  In  despite  of  much  preaching  and  some 
persecution,  these  errors  made  a  continual  progress;  till  In- 
nocent III.,  in  1198,  despatched  commissaries,  the  seed  of  the 
inquisition,  with  ample  powers  both  to  investigate  and  to 
chastise.  Raymond  VX,  count  of  Toulouse,  whether  in- 
clined towards  the  innovators,  as  was  then  the  theme  of 
reproach,  or,  as  is  more  probable,  disgusted  with  the  insolent 
interference  of  the  pope  and  his  missionaries,  provoked  them 
to  pronounce  a  sentence   of   excommunication   against   him. 

,nrto        Thousrh  this  was  taken  off,  he  was  still  suspected; 
a.d.  1208.  °        .  '  «..*.. 

and  upon  the  assassination  ot  one  of  the  inquisitors, 

in  which  Raymond  had  no  concern,  Innocent  published  a  cru- 
sade both  against  the  count  and  his  subjects,  calling  upon  the 
king  of  France,  and  the  nobility  of  that  kingdom,  to  take  up 
the  cross,  with  all  the  indulgences  usually  held  out  as  allure- 
ments to  religious  warfare.  Though  Philip  would  not  inter- 
fere, a  prodigious  number  of  knights  undertook  this  enterprise, 
led  partly  by  ecclesiastics,  and  partly  by  some  of  the  first 
barons  in  France.  It  was  prosecuted  with  every  atrocious 
barbarity  which  superstition,  the  mother  of  crimes,  could  in- 
spire. Languedoc.  a  country,  for  that  age,  flourishing  and 
civilized,  was  laid  waste  by  these  desolators ;  her  cities 
burned;  her  inhabitants  swept  away  by  fire  and  the  sword. 
And  this  was  to  punish  a  fanaticism  ten  thousand  times  more 
innocent  than  their  own.  and   errors  which,  according  to  the 


p.  88.)    They  have  published,  however,  Bcribing  witness   to   the  charters  of  the 

an  instrument  of  Louis  VI.  in  favor  of  first   Capetian    kings  in  the  Recueil  des 

■  tie  church,   confirming  those  of  Historiens,   where  man;   are  published, 

former    princes.      (Appendix,     p.    473.)  though  that  of  the  duke  of   Guienne 

Neither  the  counts  of  Toulouse,  nor  any  sometimes  occurs. 

lord  of  the  province,   were  present,  in  a  '  For    the    real    tenets   of  the  Langoe 

verv  numerous  national  assembly,  at  the  docian  sectaries  r  refer  to  the  last  chap 

soronation  of  Philip  T.    (Id.  p.  "200.)    I  terof  the  present  work,  where  the  subject 

do  not  recollect  to  have  ever  met  with  the  will  be  taken  up  again, 
name  of  the  count  of  Toulouse  as  a  sub- 


France.  THE  ALBIGEOIS.  41 

worst  imputations,  left  the  laws  of  humanity  and  the  peace 
of  social  life  unimpaired.1 

The  crusaders  were  commanded  by  Simon  de  Montfort,  a 
man,  like  Cromwell,  whose  intrepidity,  hypocrisy,   Crusade 
and  ambition,  marked  him  for  the  hero  of  a  holy   against  the 

„,  '  ,,  ,  .     t  Tiii?    Albigeois. 

war.     The  energy  of  such  a  mind,  at  the  head  ot 
an  army  of  enthusiastic  warriors,  may  well  account  for  suc- 
cesses which  then  appeared  miraculous.     But  Montfort  was 
cut  off  before  he  could  realize  his  ultimate  object,  an  inde- 
pendent principality  ;  and  Raymond  was  able  to  bequeathe  the 
inheritance  of  his  ancestors  to  his  son.     Rome,  however,  was 
not  yet  appeased  ;   upon  some   new  pretence   she   a  d  1222 
raised  up  a  still  more  formidable  enemy  against  the 
younger  Raymond.     Louis  VIII.  suffered  himself  to  be  di- 
verted   from    the    conquest    of    Guienne,   to   take    the    cross 
against  the  supposed  patron  of  heresy.     After  a  short   and 
successful  war,  Louis,  dying  prematurely,  left  the  crown  of 
France  to  a  son  only  twelve  years  old.     But  the  count  of 
Toulouse  was  still  pursued,  till,  hopeless  of  safety  in  so  un 
equal  a  struggle,  he  concluded  a  treaty  upon  very    A  p  im 
hard  terms.     By  this  he  ceded  the  greater  part  of 
Languedoc ;  and,  giving  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  Alphon- 
so,  brother  of  Louis  IX.,  confirmed  to  them,  and  to  the  king 
in  failure   of   their   descendants,  the  reversion  of   the    rest, 
in  exclusion  of  any  other  children   whom  he   might    have. 
Thus  fell  the  ancient  house  of  Toulouse,  through  one  of  those 
strange  combinations  of  fortune,   which   thwart  the   natural 
course  of  human  prosperity,  and  disappoint  the  plans  of  wise 
policy  and  beneficent  government.2 

l  The  Albigensian  war  commenced  with  Velly,  Hist,  de  France,  t.  Hi.,  has  abridge  J 

the  storming  of  Beziers,  aud  a  massacre  this  work. 

wherein  15,000  persons,  or,  according  to  M.   Fauriel   edited   for   the    Collection 

some  narrations,  60,000,  were  put  to  the  des  Docuniens  Inedits,  in  1837,  a  metrical 

sword.      Not  a   living   soul   escaped,    as  history  of  the  Albigensian  crusade,  by  a 

witnesses  assure  us.     It  was  here  that  a  contemporary  calling  himself  William  of 

Cistertian  monk,  who  led  on  the  crusa-  Tudela,  which  seems  to  be  an  imaginary 

ders,   answered    the    inquiry,    how    the  name.      It    contaius  9578    verses.      Th« 

Catholics  were  to  be  distinguished  from  author  begins  as  a  vehement  enemy  of 

heretics:  Kill  them  all !    God  will  know  the  heretics  and  favorer  of  the  crusade  ; 

kis  own.     Besides  Vaissette,  see  Sisuiondi,  but  becomes,  before  his  poem  is  half  com- 

Litterature  du  Midi,  t.  i.  p.  201.  pleted,  equally  adverse  to  Montfort,  Fol- 

•-'  The   best    account   of   this    crusade  quet,  and  the  other  chiefs  of  the  persecu- 

against  the  Albigeois  is  to  be  found  in  tion,  though   never    adopting    heretical 

the  third  volume  of  Vaissette's  History  opiuions. 

of  Languedoc;  the  Benedictine  spirit  of  Sismondi  says  — bitterly,  but  uot  an- 

mildness  and  veracity  tolerably  counter-  truly  —  of  Simon  de  Montfort  :-"Ei 

balancing  the   prejudices  of  orthodoxy,  bile  guerrier,  austere   dans  ses  inceuu 


42  LOUIS  IX.  Chap.  I.  Part.  1 

The  rapid  progress  of  royal  power  under  Philip  Augustus 
Louis  ix.  and  his  son  had  scarcely  given  the  great  vassals 
i. d.  1226.  tjme  to  reflect  upon  the  change  which  it  produced 
in  their  situation.  The  crown,  with  which  some  might  singly 
have  measured  their  forces,  was  now  an  equipoise  to  their 
united  weight.  And  such  an  union  was  hard  to  be  accom- 
plished  among  men  not  always  very  sagacious  in  policy,  and 
divided  by  separate  interests  and  animosities.  They  wen' 
not,  however,  insensible  to  the  crisis  of  their  feudal  liberties  ; 
and  the  minority  of  Louis  IX.,  guided  only  by  his  mother, 
the  regent,  Blanche  of  Castile,  seemed  to  offer  a  favorable 
opportunity  for  recovering  their  former  situation.  Some  of 
the  most  considerable  barons,  the  counts  of  Britany,  Cham- 
pagne, and  la  Marche,  had,  during  the  time  of  Louis  VIII. , 
shown  an  unwillingness  to  push  the  count  of  Toulouse  too  far, 
if  they  did  not  even  keep  up  a  secret  understanding  with 
him.  They  now  broke  out  into  open  rebellion ;  but  the  ad- 
dress of  Blanche  detached  some  from  the  league,  and  her 
firmness  subdued  the  rest.  For  the  first  fifteen  years  of 
Louis's  reign,  the  struggle  was  frequently  renewed ;  till  re- 
peated humiliations  convinced  the  refractory  that  the  throne 
was  no  longer  to  be  shaken.  A  prince  so  feeble  as  Henry 
III.  was  unable  to  afford  them  that  aid  from  England,  which, 
if  his  grandfather  or  son  had  then  reigned,  might  probably 
have  lengthened  these  civil  wars. 

But  Louis  IX.  had  methods  of  preserving  his  ascendency 
His  charac-  veiT  different  from  military  prowess.  That  excel- 
ter.  its  ex-  lent  prince  was  perhaps  the  most  eminent  pattern 
of  unswerving  probity  and  Christian  strictness  of 
conscience  that  ever  held  the  sceptre  in  any  country.  There 
is  a  peculiar  beauty  in  the  reign  of  St.  Louis,  because  it  shows 
the  inestimable  benefit  which  a  virtuous  king  may  confer  on 
his  people,  without  possessing  any  distinguished  genius.  For 
nearly  half  a  century  that  he  governed  France  there  is  not 
the  smallest  want  of  moderation  or  disinterestedness  in  his 
actions  ;  and  yet  he  raised  the  influence  of  the  monarchy  to 
a  much  higher  point  than  the  most  ambitious  of  his  predeces- 

fanatique    dans    ea    religion,   inflexible,  exasperated  that  irritable  body  and  ag- 

cruel.  et  perfide,  il  reunissait  toutes  les  gravated   their    revenge.     (Michelet,   iii. 

qnalite*    qui    pouvaient    plaire    a    un  306.)    But  the  atrocities  of  that  war  have 

mom*"     (Vol.    vi.   p.   297.)     The    Albi-  hardlv  been  equalled,  and  SismoDdi  wai 

gensian  sectaries  had  insulted  the  clergy  not  the  man  to  conceal  them, 
and  hissed  St.  Bernard ;  which,  of  course. 


France.  HIS   CHARACTER.  43 

sors.     To  the  surprise  of  his  own  and  later  times,  he  restored 
great  part  of  his  conquests  to  Henry  III.,  whom  ^^ 

he  might  naturally  hope  to  have  expelled  from 
France.  It  would  indeed  have  been  a  tedious  work  to  con 
quer  Guienne,  which  was  full  of  strong  places ;  and  the  sub- 
jugation of  such  a  province  might  have  alarmed  the  other 
vassals  of  his  crown.  But  it  is  the  privilege  only  of  virtuous 
minds  to  perceive  that  wisdom  resides  in  moderate  counsels : 
no  sagacity  ever  taught  a  selfish  and  ambitious  sovereign  to 
forego  the  sweetness  of  immediate  power.  An  ordinary 
king,  in  the  circumstances  of  the  French  monarchy,  would 
have  fomented,  or,  at  least,  have  rejoiced  in,  the  dissensions 
which  broke  out  among  the  principal  vassals  ;  Louis  con- 
stantly employed  himself  to  reconcile  them.  In  this,  too,  his 
benevolence  had  all  the  effects  of  far-sighted  policy.  It  had 
been  the  practice  of  his  three  last  predecessors  to  interpose 
their  mediation  in  behalf  of  the  less  powerful  classes,  the 
clergy,  the  inferior  nobility,  and  the  inhabitants  of  chartered 
towns.  Thus  the  supremacy  of  the  crown  became  a  familial 
idea ;  but  the  perfect  integrity  of  St.  Louis  wore  away  all 
distrust,  and  accustomed  even  the  most  jealous  feudataries  to 
look  upon  him  as  their  judge  and  legislator.  And  as  the 
royal  authority  was  hitherto  shown  only  in  its  most  amiable 
prerogatives,  the  dispensation  of  favor,  and  the  redress  of 
wrong,  few  were  watchful  enough  to  remark  the  transition  of 
the  French  constitution  from  a  feudal  league  to  an  absolute 
monarchy. 

It  was  perhaps  fortunate  for  the  display  of  St.  Louis's  vir- 
tues that  the  throne  had  already  been  strengthened  by  the 
less  innocent  exertions  of  Philip  Augustus  and  Louis  VIII. 
A  century  earlier  his  mild  and  scrupulous  character,  unsus- 
tained  by  great  actual  power,  might  not  have  inspired  suffi- 
cient awe.  But  the  crown  was  now  grown  so  formidable, 
and  Louis  was  so  eminent  for  his  firmness  and  bravery, 
qualities  without  which  every  other  virtue  would  have  been 
ineffectual,  that  no  one  thought  it  safe  to  run  wantonly  into 
rebellion,  while  his  disinterested  administration  gave  no  one  a 
pretext  for  it.  Hence  the  latter  part  of  his  reign  was  alto- 
gether tranquil,  and  employed  in  watching  over  the  public 
peace  and  the  security  of  travellers ;  administering  justice 
personally,  or  by  the  best  counsellors;  and  compiling  that 
code  of  feu  lal  customs  called  the  Establishments  of  St.  Louis, 


44  CHARACTER  OF   LOCIS   IX.      Chap    I.  Part  I 

which  is  the  first  monument  of  legislation  after  the  accession 
of  the  house  of  Capet.  Not  satisfied  with  the  justice  of  his 
own  conduct,  Louis  aimed  at  that  act  of  virtue  which  is  rarely 
practised  by  private  men,  and  had  perhaps  no  example  among 
kings  —  restitution.  Commissaries  were  appointed  to  inquire 
what  possessions  had  been  unjustly  annexed  to  the  royal  do- 
main during  the  last  two  reigns.  These  were  re.-tored  to  the 
proprietors,  or,  where  length  of  time  had  made  it  difficult  to 
ascertain  the  claimant,  their  value  was  distributed  among 
the  poor.1 

It  has  been  hinted  already  that  all  this  excellence  of  heart 
_,  ,  .       in  Louis  IX.  was  not  attended  with  that  strength 
of  understanding,  which  is  necessary,  we  must  al- 
low, to  complete  the  usefulness  of  a  sovereign.     Duiing  his 
minority  Blanche  of  Castile,  his  mother,  had  filled  the  office 
of  Regent   with   great  courage  and  firmness.     But  after  he 
grew  up  to  manhood,  her  influence  seems  to  have  parsed  tl 
limit  which  gratitude  and   piety  would  have   assigned   to  i 
and,  as  her  temper  was  not  very  meek  or   popular,  expose 
the  king  to  some  degree  of  contempt.     He  submitted  even  t( 
be  restrained  from  the  society  of  his  wife   Margaret,  daugh- 
ter of  Raymond  count  of  Provence,  a  princess  of  great  vir 
cue  and  conjugal  affection.     Joinville  relates  a  curious  story, 
characteristic  of  Blanche's  arbitrary  conduct,  and  sufficiently 
derogatory  to  Louis.2 

But  the  principal  weakness  of  this  king,  which  almost  ef- 
faced all  the  good  effects  of  his  virtues,  was  superstition.  It 
would  be  idle  to  sneer  at  those  habits  of  abstemiousness  and 
mortification  which  were  part  of  the  religion  of  his  age,  and, 
at  the  worst,  were  only  injurious  to  his  own  comfort.  But  he 
had  other  prejudices,  which,  though  they  may  be  forgiven, 
must  never  be  defended.  No  man  was  ever  more  impressed 
than  St.  Louis  with  a  belief  in  the  duty  of  exterminating 
all  enemies  to  his  own  faith.  With  these  he  thought  no  lay- 
man ought  to  risk  himself  in  the  perilous  ways  of  reason- 
ing, but  to  make  answer  with  his  sword  as  stoutly  as  a  strong 
arm  and  a  fiery  zeal  could  carry  that  argument.8     Though, 

i  Velly,  torn.  v.  p.  150.    This  historian  not  to  rely. —Collection   des   Memoires 

has  very  properly  dwelt  for  almost  a  vol-  relatifs  a  1'Ilistoire  de  France,  torn.  ii.  pp 

ume  on  St,    [jouis's  internal  administra-  140-156. 

tion;  it  is  on«;  of  the  most  valuable  parts        2 Collection    des    Memoires,     torn,    ii 

of  his  work.     Joinville  is  a  real  witness,  p.  241. 
on  whom,  when  we  listen,  it  is  imnossible        3  Au?si  vous  dis  .ie,  me  dist  le  ray,  que 


Fkance  THE  CRUSADES.  45 

fortunately  for  his  tame,  the  persecution  again  <t  the  Albigeois, 
which  had  been  the  disgrace  of  his  father's  short  reign,  was 
at  an  end  before  he  reached  manhood,  he  suffered  an  hypo- 
critical monk  to  establish  a  tribunal  at  Paris  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  heresy,  where  many  innocent  persons  suffered  death. 

But  no  events  in  Louis's  life  were  more  memorable  than 
his  two  crusades,  which  lead  us  to  look  back  on  the  nature 
and  circumstances  of  that  most  singular  phenomenon  in  Eu- 
ropean history.  Though  the  crusades  involved  all  the  west- 
ern nations  of  Europe,  without  belonging  particularly  to  any 
one,  yet,  as  France  was  more  distinguished  than  the  rest  in 
most  of  those  enterprises,  I  shall  introduce  the  subject  as  a 
sort  of  disgression  from  the  main  course  of  French  history. 

Even  before  the  violation  of  Palestine  by  the  Saracen  arms 
it  had  been  a  prevailing  custom  among  the  Chris-  The 
tians  of  Europe  to  visit  those  scenes  rendered  in-  Crusades- 
teresting  by  religion,  partly  through  delight  in  the  effects  of 
local  association,  partly  in  obedience  to  the  prejudices  or  com- 
mands of  superstition.  These  pilgrimages  became  more  fre- 
quent in  later  times,  in  spite,  perhaps  in  consequence,  of  the 
danger,  and  hardships  which  attended  them.  For  a  while  the 
Mohammedan  possessors  of  Jerusalem  permitted,  or  even  en- 
couraged, a  devotion  which  they  found  lucrative  ;  but  this  was 
interrupted  whenever  the  ferocious  insolence  with  which  they 
regarded  all  infidels  got  the  better  of  their  rapacity.  During 
the  eleventh  century,  when,  from  increasing  superstition  and 
some  particular  fancies,  the  pilgrims  were  more  numerous 
than  ever,  a  change  took  place  in  the  government  of  Pales- 
tine, which  was  overrun  by  the  Turkish  hordes  from  the 
North.  These  barbarians  treated  the  visitors  of  Jerusalem 
with  still  greater  "contumely,  mingling  with  their  Mohamme- 
dan bigotry,  a  consciousness  of  strength  and  courage,  and  a 
scorn  of  the  Christians,  whom  they  knew  only  by  the  debased 
natives  of  Greece  and  Syria,  or  by  these  humble  and  defence- 
less palmers.     When  such  insults  became  known  throughout 

uul,  8i   n'est  grant  clerc,   et   theologien  degree  of  bigotry,  did  not   require  to  be 

parfait,  De  doit  disputer  aux  Juifs:  ruais  strained  farther  still  byMosheim,  vol.  iii. 

doit  rhomme  lay,  quant  il  oit  mesdire  de  p.    273  (edit.  1803).     I   may  observe,  by 

la  foy  Chretienne,  defendre  la  chose,  non  the  way,  that  this  writer,  who  sees  noth- 

pas  seulement  des  paroles,  inais  a  bonue  iug  in  Louis  IX.  except  his  intolerauce, 

espee  tranchant,  et  en  frapper  les  inedi-  ought   not  to  have  charged  him  with  is- 

eans  et  mescreaus  a  travers  le  corps  tant  suing  an  edict  in  favor  of  the  inquisitior 

qu'elle  y  pourra   entrer.  —  Joinville,  iu  in  1229,  when  he  had   not  assumed  fit- 

Collection   des  Memoires,  torn.  i.  p.  23.  government. 
This  passage,   which   shows  a   tolerable 


46  THE  CRUSADES.  Chap.  I.  Paki   i 

Europe,  they  excited  a  keen  sensation  of  resentment  among 
nations  equally  courageous  and  devout,  which,  though  wanting 
as  yet  any  definite  means  of  satisfying  itself,  was  ripe  for 
whatever  favorable  conjuncture  might  arise. 

Twenty  years  before  the  first  crusade  Gregory  VII.  had 
projected  the  scheme  of  embodying  Europe  in  arms  again-; 
Asia  —  a  scheme  worthy  of  his  daring  mind,  and  which, 
perhaps,  was  never  forgotten  by  Urban  II.,  who  in  every- 
thing loved  to  imitate  his  great  predecessor.1  This  design  of 
Gregory  was  founded  upon  the  supplication  of  the  Greek  em- 
peror Michael,  which  was  renewed  by  Alexius  Comnenus  to 
Urban  with  increased  importunity.  The  Turks  had  now  taken 
Nice,  and  threatened,  from  the  opposite  shore,  the  very  walls 
of  Constantinople.  Every  one  knows  whose  hand  held  the 
torch  to  that  inflammable  mass  of  enthusiasm  that  pervaded 
Europe;  the  hermit  of  Picardy,  who,  roused  by  witnessed 
wrongs  and  imagined  visions,  journeyed  from  land  to  land, 
the  apostle  of  an  holy  war.  The  preaching  of  Pe- 
ter was  powerfully  seconded  by  Urban.  In  the 
councils  of  Piacenza  and  of  Clermont  the  deliverance  of  Jeru 
salem  was  eloquently  recommended  and  exultingly  undertaken. 
"  It  is  the  will  of  God  ! "  was  the  tumultuous  cry  that  broke 
from  the  heart  and  lips  of  the  assembly  at  Clermont ;  and 
these  words  afford  at  once  the  most  obvious  and  most  certain 
explanation  of  the  leading  principle  of  the  crusades.  Later 
writers,  incapable  of  sympathizing  with  the  blind  fervor  of 
zeal,  or  anxious  to  find  a  pretext  for  its  effect  somewhat  more 
congenial  to  the  spirit  of  our  times,  have  sought  political  rea- 
sons for  that  which  resulted  only  from  predominant  affections. 
No  suggestion  of  these  will,  I  believe,  be  found  in  contempo- 
rary historians.  To  rescue  the  Greek  empire  from  its  immi- 
nent peril,  and  thus  to  secure  Christendom  from  enemies  who 
professed  towards  it  eternal  hostility,  might  have  been  a  legiti- 
mate and  magnanimous  ground  of  interference  ;  but  it  oper- 
ated scarcely,  or  not  at  all,  upon  those  who  took  the  cross.  It 
argues,  indeed,  strange  ignorance  of  the  eleventh  century  to 
ascribe  such  refinements  of  later  times  even  to  the  princes  of 
that  age.     The  Turks  were  no  doubt  repelled  from  the  neigh  - 

i  Gregory  addressed,  in  1074,  a  sort  of  walls  of  Constantinople.     No  mention  of 

tmcyclic  letter  to  all  who  would   defend  Palestine  is  made  in  this  letter.     Labbe. 

the  Christian  faith,  enforcing  upon  them  Concilia,  t.  x.  p.  44.     St.  Marc,    Abreg* 

the  duty  of  taking  up  arms  against  the  Chron.  de  1'IIist.  de  l'ltalie,  t.  iii.  p.  61^ 
Sararens,  who  had  almost  come  up  to  the 


France.  THE  CRUSADES.  47 

borhood  of  Constantinople  by  the  crusaders  ;  but  this  was  a 
collateral  effect  of  their  enterprise.  Nor  had  they  any  dispo- 
sition to  serve  the  interest  of  the  Greeks,  whom  they  soon 
came  to  hate,  and  not  entirely  without  provocation,  with*  al- 
most as  much  animosity  as  the  Moslems  themselves. 

Every  means  was  used  to  excite  an  epidemical  frenzy :  the 
remission  of  penance,  the  dispensation  from  those  practices 
of  self-denial  which  superstition  imposed  or  suspended  at 
pleasure,  the  absolution  of  all  sins,  and  the  assurance  of 
eternal  felicity.  None  doubted  that  such  as  perished  in  the 
war  received  immediately  the  reward  of  martyrdom.1  False 
miracles  and  fanatical  prophecies,  which  were  never  so  fre- 
quent, wrought  up  the  enthusiasm  to  a  still  higher  pitch. 
A.nd  these  devotional  feelings,  which  are  usually  thwarted 
and  balanced  by  other  passions,  fell  in  with  every  motive  that 
could  influence  the  men  of  that  time  ;  with  curiosity,  restless- 
ness, the  love  of  license,  thirst  for  war,  emulation,  ambition, 
Of  the  princes  who  assumed  the  cross,  some  probably  from 
the  beginning  speculated  upon  forming  independent  establish- 
ments in  the  East.  In  later  periods  the  temporal  benefits  of 
undertaking  a  crusade  undoubtedly  blended  themselves  with 
le-;<  selfish  considerations.  Men  resorted  to  Palestine,  as  in 
modem  times  they  have  done  to  the  colonies,  in  order  to 
redeem  their  fame,  or  repair  their  fortune.  Thus  Gui  de 
Lusignan,  after  flying  from  France,  for  murder,  was  ulti- 
mately raised  to  the  throne  of  Jerusalem.  To  the  more  vul- 
var class  were  held  out  inducements  which,  thouo-h  absorbed 
in  the  overruling  fanaticism  of  the  first  crusade,  might  be 
exceedingly  efficacious  when  it  began  rather  to  flag.  During 
ihe  time  that  a  crusader  bore  the  cross  he  was  free  from  suit 
for  his  debts,  and  the  interest  of  them  was  entirely  abolished  ; 
h»j  was  exempted,  in  some  instances  at  least,  from  taxes,  and 
placed  under  the  protection  of  the  church,  so  that  he  could 
not  be  impleaded  in  any  civil  court,  except  on  criminal 
charges,  or  disputes  relating  to  land.2 

None  of  the  sovereigns  of  Europe  took  a  part  in  the  first 


i  Nam  qui  pro  Christi  nc  urine   decer-  serted  a  bull  of  Eugenius   III.  in  1146, 

tantes,   in    acie  fidelium  et    Christiana  containing     some    of    these     privileges, 

militia  dicuntur,  occumbere,  non  solum  Others  are  granted  by  Philip  Augustui 

infamise,  verum  et  peccaminum  et  delic-  in    1214.        Ordonnances     des    Roi    d 

:orum  omnimodamcredimusabohtionem  France,  torn.  1.     See  also  Du  Cange,  tw 

promereri.     Will.  Tyr.  1.  x.  c.  20.  Crucis  Privilegia. 

2  Othn  of  Frisengen,    c.  35,    has    in- 


48  FIRST  CRUSADE.  Chap.  I.  Part  1 

crusade  ;  but  many  of  their  chief  vassals,  great  part  of  the 
inferior  nobility,  and  a  countless  multitude  of  the  common 
people.  The  priests  left  their  parishes,  and  the  monks  their 
cells;  and  though  the  peasantry  were  then  in  general  hound 
to  the  soil,  we  find  no  check  given  to  their  emigration  for  this 
cause.  Numbers  of  women  and  children  swelled  the  crowd  ; 
it  appeared  a  sort  of  sacrilege  to  repel  any  one  from  a  work 
which  was  considered  as  the  manifest  design  of  Providence. 
But  if  it  were  lawful  to  interpret  the  will  of  Providence  by 
events,  few  undertakings  have  been  more  branded  by  its  dis- 
approbation than  the  crusades.  So  many  crimes  and  so  much 
misery  have  seldom  been  accumulated  in  so  short  a  space  as 
in  the  three  years  of  the  first  expedition.  We  should  be 
warranted  by  contemporary  writers  in  stating  the  loss  of  the 
Christians  alone  during  this  period  at  nearly  a  million  ;  but 
at  the  least  computation  it  must  have  exceeded  half  that  num- 
ber.1 To  engage  in  the  crusade,  and  to  perish  in  it,  were 
almost  synonymous.  Few  of  those  myriads  who  were  mus- 
tered in  the  plains  of  Nice  returned  to  gladden  their  friends 
in  Europe  with  the  story  of  their  triumph  at  Jerusalem. 
Besieging  alternately  and  besieged  in  Antioch,  they  drained 
to  the  lees  the  cup  of  misery :  three  hundred  thousand  sat 
down  before  that  place;  next  year  there  remained  but  a  sixth 
part  to  pursue  the  enterprise.  But  their  losses  were  least  in 
the  field  of  battle ;  the  intrinsic  superiority  of  European 
prowess  was  constantly  displayed ;  the  angel  of  Asia,  to  apply 
the  bold  language  of  our  poet,  high  and  unmatchable,  where 
her  rival  was  not,  became  a  fear ;  and  the  Christian  lances 
bore  all  before  them  in  their  shock  from  Nice  to 
Antioch,  Edessa,  and  Jerusalem.  It  was  here, 
where  their  triumph  was  consummated,  that  it  was  stained 
with  the  most  atrocious  massacre ;  not  limited  to  the  hour  of 
resistance,  but  renewed  deliberately  even  after  that  famous 
penitential  procession  to  the  holy  sepulchre,  which  might  have 
calmed  their  ferocious  dispositions,  if,  through  the  misguided 
enthusiasm  of  the  enterprise,  it  had  not  been  rather  calculated 
to  excite  them.2 

1   William  of  Tyre  says  that  at  the  been    made  in   Hungary   of  the  rabble 

review    before    Nice    there  were    found  under  Gaultier  Sans-Avoir. 

600,000  of  both  sexes,  exclusive  of  100,000  2  The  work  of  Mailly,  entitled  L'Eeprit 

cavalry  armed  iu  mail.    L.  ii.  c.  23.    But  des  Croisades,  i-  deserving  of  considerable 

Fulk  of  Chartres  reckons  the  same  nuui-  praise  for  its    diligence  ami  impartiality 

ber,besidcs  women,  children,  and  priests,  tt  carries  the  history,  however,  no  farther 

An    Immense   slaughter  had   previously  than  the  first  expedition.     Gibbons  two 


France. 


THE  SECOND  CRUSADE.  45 


The  conquests  obtained  at  such  a  price  by  the  first  crusade 
were   chiefly  comprised  in   the  maritime  parts  of  Latin  con_ 
Syria.      Except  the  state  of  Edessa  beyond  the  quests  in 
Euphrates,1  which,  in  its  best  days,  extended  over  Syna- 
great    part    of    Mesopotamia,    the  Latin    possessions    never 
reached  more  than  a  few  leagues  from  the  sea.      Within  the 
barrier  of  Mount   Libanus  their  arms  might  be  feared,  but 
their  power  was  never  established ;  and  the  prophet  was  still 
invoked  in  the  mosques  of  Aleppo  and  Damascus.     The  prin- 
cipality of  Antioch  to  the   north,   the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem 
with  its  feudal  dependencies  of  Tripoli   and   Tiberias   to  the 
south,  were  assigned,  the  one  to  Boemond,  a  brother  of  Rob- 
ert CJuiseard,  count  of  Apulia,  the  other  to  Godfrey  of  Bou- 
logne,2 whose  extraordinary  merit  had  justly  raised  him  to  a 
degree  of  influence  with    the   chief  crusaders,  that   has   been 
sometimes  confounded  with  a   legitimate   authority.8     In    the 
course  of  a  few  years  Tyre,  Asealon,  and  the  other  cities  upon 
the  sea-coast,  were  subjected  by  the  successors  of  Godfrey  on 
the  throne  of  Jerusalem.     But  as   their   enemies   had  been 
stunned,  not  killed,  by  the  western  storm,  the   Latins   were 
constantly   molested    by   the    Mohammedans    of   Egypt   and 
Syria.     They  were  exposed  as  the  outposts  of  Christendom, 
with  no  respite   and   few  resources.     A   second   crusade,  in 
which  the  emperor  Conrad  III.  and  Louis  VII.  of  Secoud 
France  we're  engaged,  each  with  seventy  thousand  crusade. 
cavalry,    made    scarce    any    diversion ;    and    that  ' 
vast  army  wasted  away  in  the  passage  of  Natolia.4 

chapters  on   the  crusades,   thongh    not  himself,    Rex     Hierusalem,     Latinoruui 

without  inaccuracies,  are  a  brilliant  por-  primus.     Will.  Tyr.  1.  ii.  c.  12. 

tion    of    his  great    work.      The   original  3  The  heroes    of  the  crusade    are  just 

writers  are  chiefly  collected  in   two  folio  like  those  of  romance.      Godfrey    is   not 

volumes,  entitled  Gesta  Dei  per  Francos,  only  the  wisest  but  the  strongest  man  in 

Hanover,  1611.  the  army.     Perhaps  Tasso  has  lost  some 

i  Edessa  was  a    little    Christian  princi  part  of  this  physical   superiority  for  the 

palitv,  surrounded   by,  and  tributary  to.  sake  of  contrasting  him  with    the  imagi- 

the    Turks.       The    inhabitants    invited  nary    Rinal.lo.       lie   cleaves    a   Turk    in 

Baldwin,  on  his  progress  in  the  first  cru-  twain,  from  the  shoulder  to  the  haunch. 

sade,  and   he  made  no  great  scrup'e   of  A  noble    Arab,  after  the  taking  of  Jeru 

supplanting    the    reigning    prince,    who  salem,  requests  him  to  try  his  sword  upon 

indeed  is  represented   as   a   tyrant  and  a  camel,  when    Godfrey,   with  ease,  cuts 

usurper.     Esprit   des   Croisades,  t.  iv.  p.  off  the  head      The  Arab,  suspecting  there 

62.     De  Guignes,  Hist,  des  Huns,  torn.  ii.  might  be  something  peculiar  in  the  blade, 

p.  135-162.  desires    him   to  do  the    same   with    hii 

2 Godfrey  never  took  the  title  of  King  sword;    and    the   hero   obliges   him^   by 

of  Jerusalem,   not  choosing,  he   said,  to  demolishing  a  second  camel.      Will.  Tyr. 

wear  a  crown  of  gold  in    that   city  where  1.  ix.  c.  22. 

his    Saviour    had     been    crowned    with  4  Vertot  puts    the    destruction    in  the 

thorns    Baldwin,  Godfrey's  brother,  who  second  crusade  at  two  hundred  thousand 

succeeded  him  within  two  years,  entitles  men  (Hist,  de  Malthe.  p.  129);  and  from 


•OL.   i    —  M, 


4 


50  THE  SECOND  CRUSADE.         Chap.  I.  Pakt  i 

The  decline  of  the  Christian  establishments  in  the  East  ifl 

ascribed  by  William  of  Tyre  to   the  extreme  viciou-n< 
Decline  of       their   manners,  to    (lie  adoption  of  European  arms 
the  Latin        by  the  Orientals,  and  to  the  union  of  the  Mohain- 
ti'es'ii'i'the      medan  principalities  under  a  single  chief.1     With- 
East.  out   denying  the  operation  of    these  cause-,    and 

especially  the  last,  it  is  easy  to  perceive  one  more  radical  than 
all  the  three,  the  inadequacy  of  their  means  of  self-defence. 
The  kingdom  of  Jerusalem  was  guarded  only,  exclusive  of 
European  volunteers,  by  the  feudal  service  of  eight  hundred 
and  sixty-six  knights,  attended  each  by  four  archers  on 
horseback,  by  a  militia  of  five  thousand  and  seventy-five 
burghers,  and  by  a  conscription,  in  great  exigencies,  of  the 
remaining  population.2  William  of  Tyre  mentions  an  army 
of  one  thousand  three  hundred  horse  and  fifteen  thousand 
foot,  as  the  greatest  which  had  ever  been  collected,  and  pre- 
dicts the  utmost  success  from  it,  if  wisely  conducted.3  This 
was  a  little  before  the  irruption  of  Saladin.  In  the  last  fatal 
battle  Lusignan  seems  to  have  had  somewhat  a  larger  force.4 
Nothing  can  more  strikingly  evince  the  ascendency  of  Europe 
than  the  resistance  of  these  Prankish  acquisitions  in  Syria 
during  nearly  two  hundred  years.  Several  of  their  victories 
over  the  Moslems  were  obtained  against  such  disparity  of 
numbers,  that  they  may  be  compared  with  whatever  is  most 
illustrious  in  history  or  romance.5  These  perhaps  were  less 
due  to  the  descendants  of  the  first  crusaders,   settled   in  the 

William  of  Tyre's  language,  there  seems  inflowing  robes.       Montfaucon,    Monu- 

no  reason  to  consider  this   an  exaggera-  mens  de   la  Monarchic   Fraucaise,    t.    i. 

tion.     L.  xvi.  c.  19.  pi.  50. 

i  L.   xxi.  c.    7.      John   of  Vitry   also  2  Gibbon,  c.  29.  note  125.      Jerusalem 

mentions  the  change  of  weapons   by  the  itself  was  very  thinly  inhabited.     For  all 

Saracens,  in  imitation  of  the  Latins,  using  the  heathens,  says  William  of  Tyre,  had 

the  lances  ami  coat  of  mail  instead  of  perished  in  the   massacre  when  the  city 

bows  and  arrows,  c.  92.     But,  according  was  taken;   or,  if  anj  escaped,  they  were 

to  a  more  ancient  writer,   part  of  Soli-  not  allowed  to  return  :  no  heathen  being 

man  s  (the  Kilidge  Arslanof  De  Guignes)  thought  fit  to  dwell    in   the   holy  city. 

rtruiv  in  the  first  crusade"  was  in  armor.  Baldwin  invited  some  Arabian  Chi 

loricis  et    galeis  et  clypeis  aureis  valde  to  settle  in  it. 

armati.     Albertus  Aquensis,  1.  ii.  c.  27.  *L.  xxii.  c.  27. 

[  may  add  to  this  a  testimony  of  another  *  A  primo  introitu  Latinorum  in  ter 

kind,  not  less  decisive.      In    the  Abbey  ram  sanctam,  says  John  de  Vitry,  nosrri 

of  St.  Denis  there  were  ten   pictures,  hi  tot   milites    in    uno    proelio    cong 

stained   glass,    representing    sieges    and  nequiverunt.     Erant  enim  mille  d 

•  in  the  first  crusade.                   ire  milites   Loricati;     peditum    autem    emu 

made  by  order  of  Suger,  the  minister  of  armis,  arcubus  et  balistis  circiter  riginti 

Louis  VI.,  and  consequently  in  the  early  millia,   infaustae  expedition!   interfuiase 

part  of  the  twelfth  century.     Tn  many  of  dieuntur.    Gcsta  dei  per  Francos,  p.  1118 

them  the  Turks  are   p.unted  in  coats  of  5  A  brief  summary  of  these  victories  is 

mail,  sometimes  even  In  a  plated  cuirass,  given  bv  John  of  Vitry,  c.  98 
In  others  they  are  quite  unarmed,  and 


France.  THIRD  CRUSADE.  5] 

Holy  Land,1  than  to  those  volunteers  from  Europe  whom 
martial  ardor  and  religious  zeal  impelled  to  the  service.  It 
was  the  penance  commonly  imposed  upon  men  of  rank  for 
the  most  heinous  crimes,  to  serve  a  number  of  years  under 
the  banner  of  the  cross.  Thus  a  perpetual  supply  of  warriors 
was  poured  in  from  Europe ;  and  in  this  sense  the  crusades 
may  be  said  to  have  lasted  without  intermission  during  the 
whole  period  of  the  Latin  settlements.  Of  these  defenders 
the  most  renowned  were  the  military  orders  of  the  Knights 
of  the  Temple  and  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  John  ;2  instituted, 
the  one  in  1124,  the  other  in  1118,  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
protecting  the  Holy  Land.  The  Teutonic  order,  established 
in  1190,  when  the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem  was  falling,  soot 
diverted  its  schemes  of  holy  warfare  to  a  very  different  quar- 
ter of  the  world.  Large  estates,  as  well  in  Palestine  as 
throughout  Europe,  enriched  the  two  former  institutions ;  but 
the  pride,  rapaciousness,  and  misconduct  of  both,  especially 
of  the  Templars,  seem  to  have  balanced  the  advantages 
derived  from  their  valor.3  At  length  the  famous  A  ng7 
Saladin,  usurping  the  throne  of  a  feeble  dynasty 
which  had  reigned  in  Egypt,  broke  in  upon  the  Christians  of 
Jerusalem ;  the  king  and  the  kingdom  fell  into  his  hands ; 
nothing  remained  but  a  few  strong  towns  upon  the  sea-coast 
These  misfortunes  roused  once  more  the  princes  of  Europe, 
and  the  third  crusade  was  undertaken  by  three  Third 
of  her  sovereigns,  the  greatest  in  personal  estima-  crusade- 
tion  as  well  as  dignity  —  by  the  emperor  Frederic  A'D" 1189" 
Barbarossa,  Philip  Augustus  of  France,  and  our  own  Rich- 
ard Coeur  de  Lion.  But  this,  like  the  preceding  enterprise, 
failed  of  permanent  effect ;  and  those  feats  of  romantic 
prowess  which  made  the  name  of  Richard  so  famous  both  in 
Europe  and  Asia  4  proved  only  the  total  inefficacy  of  all  ex- 

i  Siany  of  these  v-:a  of  a  mongrel  ex-  3  See  a  curious  instance  of  the  miscon- 

traction,  descended  from  a  Frank  parent  duct  and  insolence  of  the  Templars,   in 

on  one  side,  and   Syrian  on  the  othwr.  William  of  Tyre,  1.  xx.  c.  32.     The  Tem- 

Thsse  were  called  Poulains,  Pullani ;  and  plars  possessed   nine   thousand  mauors, 

were  looked  upon  as  a  mean,  degenerate  and  the  Knights  of  St.  John  nineteen 

race.     Du  Cange ;  Gloss,  v.  Pullani ;  and  thousand,  in  Europe      The   latter  were 

Observations  sur  Joinville,  in  Collection  almost  as  much   reprc ached  as  the  Tein- 

des    Memoires    relatifs   a    l'Histoire    de  plars  for    their  pride   and   avarice.      L. 

France,  t.  ii.  p.  190.  xviii.  e.  6. 

2   The    St.    John    of    Jerusalem    was  *  When   a   Turk's   horse   started  at  a 

neither  the  Evangelist  nor  yet  the  Bap-  bush,  he  would  chide  him,  Joinville  says, 

tist,  but  a  certain  Cypriot,  surnamed  the  with,  Cuides-tu  qu'y  soit  le  roi  Richard  ' 

Charitable,  who    had   been   patriarch  of  Women   kept  their   children  quiet  wi(h 

Mexandria.  the  threat  of  bringing  Richard  to  them 


52  CRUSADKS   OF  ST.    LOUIS.     Chai    I.  I'a.:i    i 

ertions  in  an  attempt  so  impracticable ;  Palestine  was  never 
a. d.  1204.  the  scene  of  another  crusade.  One  great  arma 
a.».  1218.  rnent  was  diverted  lo  the  siege  of  Constantinople 
and  another  wasted  in  fruitless  attempts  upon  Egypt.  Tlu 
emperor  Frederic  II.  afterwards  procured  the  restoration  of 
Jerusalem  by  the  Saracens;  but  the  Christian  princes  of 
Syria  were  unable  to  defend  it,  and  their  possessions  were 
gradually  reduced  to  the  maritime  towns.  Acre,  the  last  of 
these,  was  finally  taken  by  storm  in  1291  ;  and  its  ruin 
closes  the  history  of  the  Latin  dominion  in  Syria,  which 
Europe  had  already  ceased  to  protect. 

The  two  last  crusades  were  undertaken  by  St.  Louis.  In 
Crusades  of  tne  first  ne  was  attended  by  2,800  knights  and 
st.  Louis.  50,000  ordinary  troops.1  He  landed  at  Damietta 
a.d.  1248.  m  Egypt,  for  that  country  was  now  deemed  the  key 
of  the  Holy  Land,  and  easily  made  himself  master  of  the 
city.  But  advancing  up  the  country,  he  found  natural  im- 
pediments as  well  as  enemies  in  his  way  ;  the  Turks  assailed 
him  with  Greek  fire,  an  instrument  of  warfare  almost  as 
surprising  and  terrible  as  gunpowder  ;  he  lost  his  brother  the 
count  of  Artois,  with  many  knights,  at  Massoura,  near  Cairo; 
and  began  too  late  a  retreat  towards  Damietta.  Such  calami- 
ties now  fell  upon  this  devoted  army  as  have  scarce  ever 
been  surpassed ;  hunger  and  want  of  every  kind,  aggravated 
by  an  unsparing  pestilence.  At  length  the  king  was  made 
prisoner,  and  very  few  of  the  army  escaped  the  Turkish 
cimeter  in  battle  or  in  captivity.  Four  hundred  thousand 
livres  were  paid  as  a  ransom  for  Louis.  He  returned  to 
France,  and  passed  near  twenty  years  in  the  exercise  of  those 
virtues  which  are  his  best  title  to  canonization.  But  the  fatal 
illusions  of  superstition  were  still  always  at  his  heart ;  nor 
did  it  fail  to  be  painfully  observed  by  his  subjects  that  he  still 
ad  1270  ^ePt  tne  cross  upon  his  garment.  His  last  expedi- 
tion was  originally  designed  for  Jerusalem.  But 
he  had  received  some  intimation  that  the  king  of*  Tunis  was 
desirous  of  embracing  Christianity.  That  these  intentions 
might  be  carried  into  effect,  lie  sailed  out  of  his  way  to  the 
coast  of  Africa,  and  laid  siege  to  that  city.     A  fever  here  put 

1  The  Arabian  writers  give   liim  9500  bnn'a  authority,  I  put  the  main  body  at 

knights   and    130,000   common    soldiers.  50,000;   but.  if  .Joiuville  has  stated  <ms. 

But  I   greatly  prefer  the    authority   of  I  have  missed  the  passage.    Their  vassal* 

J oin villi-   who  has  twice  mentioned   the  amounted  to  1800. 
number  of  knights  in  the  text.     On  Gil>- 


Frawk.  PHILIP  in.  53 

an  end  to  his  life,  sacrificed  to  that  ruling  passion  which  never 
would  have  forsaken  him.  But  he  had  survived  the  spirit  of 
the  crusades ;  the  disastrous  expedition  to  Egypt  had  cured 
his  subjects,  though  not  himself,  of  their  folly ; l  his  son,  after 
making  terms  with  Tunis,  returned  to  France ;  the  Christians 
were  suffered  to  lose  what  they  still  retained  in  the  Holy 
Land ;  and  though  many  princes  in  subsequent  ages  talked 
loudly  of  renewing  the  war,  the  promise,  if  it  were  ever 
sincere,  was  never  accomplished. 

Louis  IX.  had  increased  the  royal  domain  by  the  annexa- 
tion of  several  counties  and   other  less  important  Philip  ni. 
fiefs ;  but  soon  after  the  accession  of  Philip  III.  AD- 127°- 
(surnamed  the  Bold)  it  received  a  far  more  considerable  aug- 
mentation.    Alfonso,  the   late  king's   brother,   had  been   in- 
vested with    the    county  of   Poitou,    ceded    by  Henry  III., 
together  with  part  of  Auvergne  and  of  Saintonge ;  and  held 
also,  as  has  been  said  before,  the  remains  of  the  great  fief  of 
Toulouse,  in  right  of  his  wife  Jane,  heiress  of  Raymond  VII 
Upon  his  death,  and  that  of  his  countess,  which 
happened  about  the  same  time,  the  king  entered 
into    possession    of   all    these    territories.      This    acquisition 
brought    the    sovereigns   of   France    into   contact   with    new 
neighbors,   the   kings   of   Aragon    and   the  powers   of   Italy 
The  first  great  and  lasting  foreign  war  which  they 

.  AD     l'-'TO 

carried  on  was  that  of  Philip  III.  and  Philip  IV. 
ngainst  the  former  kingdom,  excited  by  the  insurrection  of 
Sicily.  Though  effecting  no  change  in  the  boundaries  of 
their  dominions,  this  war  may  be  deemed  a  sort  of  epoch  in 
the  history  of  France  and  Spain,  as  well  as  in  that  of  Italy, 
to  which  it  more  peculiarly  belongs. 

1  The  refusal  of  Joinville  to  accompany  puis   ouy-je   dire  a   plusieurs,   que  ceux 

Hie  king  in  this  second  crusade  is  very  qui  luy  conseillerent  l'enterprinse  de  la 

memorable,  and  gives  us  an  insight  into  croix  firent  un  trez  grant  mal,  et  peche 

the  bad  effects  of  both  expeditions.     Le  rent  mortellement.     Car  tandis  qu'i!  fu>r 

Koy  de  France  et  le  Koy  de  Navarre  me  au  rovaume  de  France,  tout  son  royaume 

pressoient  fort  de  ine  croiser,   et  entre-  vivoiteu  paix.  et  regnoit  justice.     Et  in- 

prendre    le   chemin   du    pelerinage    de   la  continent   qu'il    en   fu*t    ors,    tout    com- 

croix.     Mais  je  leur  respondi,  que  teudis  meuca  a  decliner  et  a    etnpirer.  —  T.  ii. 

que  j'avoie  e-te  oultre-mer  au  service  lie  p    158. 

Dieu,  que  les  <rens  et  officers  du   Koy  de        Tn  the  Fabliaux  of  Le  Grand  d'Aussy 

France  avoient  trop  greve  et  foulle  ines  we  have  a   neat   poem  by   Rutuboeuf,  a 

6ubjets,    tant  qu'ils  en  estoient  apovris ;  writer  of  St.  Louis's  age,  in  a  dialogue 

tellement  que  james  il  ne  seroit  que  eulx  between  a  crusader  and  a  non-crusader, 

et  moy  ne  nous  en  sortissons.     Et  veoie  wherein,   though  he  gives  the  last  wori 

cleremenr.  si  je  n^  mecloie  au  pelerinage  to  the  former,  it  is  plain  that  he  designed 

de  la  croix,  que  ce  seroit   la  totale  de-  the  opposite  scale  to  preponderate.  —  T, 

stj-uction  de  mestiz  povres  subjets.     De-  ii.  p.  163. 


54  PHILIP  i\*.  Uhap.  1.  Past  i 

Theie  still  remained  live  greal  and  ancient  liefs  of  the 
French  crown;  Champagne,  Guienne,  Flanders,  Burgundy, 
Philip  the      and    Britany.      But     Philip    IV.,    usually    called 

Filir-  the  Fair,  married  the   heiress  of  the  first,  a  little 

i.D.  1285.  before  his  father's  death;  and  although  he  gov- 
erned that  county  in  her  name  without  pretending  to  reunite 
it  to  the  royal  domain,  it  was,  at  least  in  a  political  sense,  no 
longer  a  part  of  the  feudal  body.  With  some  of  his  other 
vassals  Philip  used  more  violent  methods.  A  parallel  might 
be  drawn  between  this  prince  and  Philip  Augustus.  But 
while  in  ambition,  violence  of  temper  and  unprincipled  rapac- 
ity, as  well  as  in  the  success  of  their  attempts  to 
mentofthe  establish  an  absolute  authority,  they  may  be  con- 
French  sidered  as  nearly  equal,  we  may  remark  this  differ- 

mouarchy  J       i        >  J  , 

under  his       ence,  that  Philip  the   Fair,  who  was  destitute  of 
reign.  military  talents,  gained  those  ends  by  dissimulation 

which  his  predecessor  had  reached  by  force. 

The  duchy  of  Guienne,  though  somewhat  abridged  of  its 
original  extent,  was  still  by  far  the  most  considerable  of  the 
French  fiefs,  even  independently  of  its  connection  with  Eng- 
land.1 Philip,  by  dint  of  perfidy,  and  by  the  egregious  inca- 
pacity of  Edmund,  brother  of  Edward  I.,  contrived  to  obtain, 
and  to  keep  for  several  years,  the  possession  of  this  great 
province.  A  quarrel  among  some  French  and 
English  sailors  having  provoked  retaliation,  till  a 
sort  of  piratical  war  commenced  between  the  two  countries'. 
Edward,  as  duke  of  Guienne,  was  summoned  into  the  king's 
30urt  to  answer  for  the  trespass  of  his  subjects.  Upon  this 
he  despatched  his  brother  to  settle  terms  of  reconciliation 
with  tidier  powers  than  should  have  been  intrusted  to  so  cred 
ulous  a  negotiator.  Philip  so  outwitted  this  prince,  through  a 
fictitious  treaty,  as  to  procure  from  him  the  surrender  of  all 
the  fortresses  in  Guienne.  He  then  threw  off  the  mask,  and 
after  again   summoning  Edward  to  appear,  pronounced   the 

i  Philip  was  highly  offended   that  in-  P.  rege  Francise,  E.  rege  Angliae  teneute 

Btruments  made   in   Guienne  should  be  ducaturn  Aquitanias.    Several  precedents 

dated  by  the  year  of  Edward's  reign,  and  were  shown  by  the  English   where  the 

not  of  his  own.     This  almost  sole  hadge  counts  of  Toulouse  had  used  the  form, 

of  sovereignty  had  been  preserved  by  the  Regnante  A.  Comite  Tolosae.     Rymer,  t. 

kiugs  of    France   during  all    the   feudal  ii.    p.    1083.      As  this   is    the   first   time 

A   struggle    took    place   about  it,  that  I  quote  Rymer,  it  may  he  proper  to 

which  is  recorded  in  a  curious  letter  from  observe   that   my  references   are   to   the 

John  de  Greilli  to  Edward.     The  French  Loudon  edition,  the  paging   of  v'.ich   ifl 

court  at  last  consented   to   let    dates   be  preserved    on  the  margin  of  that  printed 

thus   expn                    bum   fuit,    regnante  at  the  Hague. 


fRANW..  AGGRANDIZEMENT   OF  FRANCE.  55 

confiscation  of  his  fief.1  This  business  is  the  greatest  blemish 
in  the  political  character  of  Edward.  But  his  eagerness  about 
the  acquisition  of  Scotland  rendered  him  less  sensible  to  the 
danger  of  a  possession  in  many  respects  more  valuable ;  and 
the  spirit  of  resistance  among  the  English  nobility,  which  his 
arbitrary  measures  had  provoked,  broke  out  very  ,,,_ 

opportunely  for  irhilip,  to  thwart   every  effort  for 
the   recovery  of  Guienne  by  arms.     But  after  repeated   sus- 
pensions of  hostilities  a  treaty  was  finally  concluded,  by  which 
Philip  restored  the  province,  on  the  agreement  of  a  marriage 
between  his  daughter  Isabel  and  the  heir  of  England. 

To  this  restitution  he  was  chiefly  induced  by  the  ill  success 
that  attended  his  arms  in  Flanders,  another  of  the  great  fiefs 
which  this  ambitious  monarch  had  endeavored  to  confiscate. 
We  have  not,  perhaps,  as  clear  evidence  of  the  original  injus- 
tice of  his  proceedings  towards  the  count  of  Flanders  as  in 
the  case  of  Guienne ;  but.  he  certainly  twice  detained  his  per- 
son, once  after  drawing  him  on  some  pretext  to  his  court,  and 
again,  in  violation  of  the  faith  pledged  by  his  generals.  The 
Flemings  made,  however,  so  vigorous  a  resistance, 
that  Philip  was  unable  to  reduce  that  small  coun- 
try ;  and  in  one  famous  battle  at  Courtray  they  discomfited  a 
powerful  army  with  that  utter  loss  and  ignominy  to  which  the 
undisciplined  impetuosity  of  the  French  nobles  was  preemi- 
nently exposed.2 

Two  other  acquisitions  of  Philip  the  Fair  deserve  notice  ; 
that  of  the  counties  of  Angouleme  and  La  Marche,  upon  a 
sentence  of  forfeiture  (and,  as  it  seems,  a  very  harsh  one) 
passed  against  the  reigning  count ;  and  that  of  the  city  of 
Lyons,  and  its  adjacent  territory,  which  had  not  even  feu- 
dally been  subject  to  the  crown  of  France  for  more  than  three 
hundred  years.  Lyons  was  the  dowry  of  Matilda,  daughter 
of  Louis  IV.,  on  her  marriage  with  Conrad,  king  of  Bur- 
gundy, and  was  bequeathed  with  the  rest  of  that  kingdom  by 
Rodolph,  in  1032,  to  the  empire.  Frederic  Barbarossa  con- 
ferred upon  the  archbishop  of  Lyons  all  regalian  rights  over 
the  city,  with  the  title  of  Imperial  Vicar.     France  seems  to 

1  In  the  view  I  have    taken  of   this  2The  Flemings  took  at  Courtray  4000 

transaction  I  have  been  guided  by  several  pair  of  gilt  spurs,  which  were  only  worn 

instruments  in  Rymer,   which  leave  no  by  knights.  These  Velly,  happily  enough, 

doubt  on  my  mind.    Velly  of  course  rep-  compares  to  Hannibal's  three  bushels  cf 

resents   the   matter   more   favorably    for  gold  rings  at  Cannae. 
Philip. 


56  THE   SALIC   LAW.  Uhap.  J.  1'aki  1 

have  had  no  concern  with  it,  till  St.  Loui-  was  called  in  as  a 
mediator  in  disputes  between  the  chapter  and  the  city,  during 
a  vacancy  of  the  see,  and  took  the  exercise  of  jurisdiction 
upon  himself  for  the  time.  Philip  III.,  having  been  chosen 
arbitrator  in  similar  circumstances,  insisted,  before  he  would 
restore  the  jurisdiction,  upon  an  oath  of  fealty  from  the  new 
archbishop.  This  oath,  which  could  be  demanded,  it  seems, 
by  no  right  but  that  of  force,  continued  to  be  taken,  till,  in 
1310,  an  archbishop  resisting  what  he  had  thought  an  usurpa- 
tion, the  city  was  besieged  by  Philip  IV.,  and,  the  inhabitants 
not  being  unwilling  to  submit,  was  finally  united  to  the 
French  crown.1 

Philip  the  Fair  left  three  sons,  who  successively  reigned  in 
Louis  x.  France;  Louis,  surnamed  Hutin,  Philip  the  Long, 
a.d.  1314.  anc]  Charles  the  Fair  ;  with  a  daughter,  Isabel,  mar- 
ried to  Edward  II.  of  England.2  Louis,  the  eldest,  survived 
his  father  little  more  than  a  year,  leaving  one  daughter,  and 
his  queen  pregnant.  The  circumstances  that  en- 
Sa^iJhSS. °f  suea*  require  to  be  accurately  stated.  Louis  had 
Philip  v.  possessed,  in  right  of  his  mother,  the  kingdom  of 
Navarre,  with  the  counties  of  Champagne  and 
Brie.  Upon  his  death,  Philip,  his  next  brother,  assumed  the 
regency  both  of  France  and  Navarre  ;  and  not  long  afterwards 
entered  into  a  treaty  with  Eudes,  duke  of  Burgundy,  uncle  of 
the  princess  Jane,  Louis's  daughter,  by  which  her  eventual 
rights  to  the  succession  were  to  be  regulated.  It  was  agreed 
that,  in  case  the  queen  should  be  delivered  of  a  daughter, 
these  two  princesses,  or  the  survivor  of  them,  should  take  the 
grandmother's  inheritance,  Navarre  and  Champagne,  on  re- 
Leasing  all  claim  to  the  throne  of  France.  But  this  was  not 
to  take  place  till  their  age  of  consent,  when,  if  they  should 
refuse  to  make  such  renunciation,  their  claim  was  to  remain, 
and  right  to  be  done  to  them  therein  ;  but,  in  return,  the  release 
made  by  Philip  of  Navarre  and  Champagne  was  to  be  null. 
In  the  mean  time,  he  was  to  hold  the  government  of  France, 
Navarre,  and  Champagne,  receiving  homage  of  vassals  in  all 
these  countries  as  governor ;  saving  the  right  of  a  male  heir 
to  the  late  king,  in  the  event  of  A'hose  birth  the  treaty  was 
n«»t  to  take  effect.8 

1  Velly,  t.  vii.  p.  404.     For  a  more  pre-  2  [Note  XV.] 

cise  account  of  the  political   .lr)iendencrt  3  mst.  de  Charles  le  Mauvais   par  84 

of  Lyons  and  if<  district,  sir    [/Art   de  cousse.  vol.  ii    p. 2 
verifier  les  D.itc>.  i    ii.  |,    169 


France  PHILIP  V.  57 

This  convention  was  made  on  the  17th  of  July,  1316 ;  and 
on  the  loth  of  November  the  queen  brought  into  the  world  a 
son,  John  I.  (as  some  called  him),  who  died  in  four  days.1 
The  conditional  treaty  was  now  become  absolute  ;  in  spirit,  at 
least,  if  any  cavil  might  be  raised  about  the  expression  ;  and 
Philip  was,  by  his  own  agreement,  precluded  from  taking  any 
other  title  than  that  of  regent  or  governor,  until  the  princess 
Jane  should  attain  the  age  to  concur  in  or  disclaim  the  pro- 
visional contract  of  her  uncle.  Instead  of  this,  however,  he 
procured  himself  to  be  consecrated  at  Rheims ;  though,  on 
account  of  the  avowed  opposition  of  the  duke  of  Burgundy, 
and  even  of  his  own  brother  Charles,  it  was  thought  prudent 
to  shut  the  gates  during  the  ceremony,  and  to  dispose  guards 
throughout  the  town.  Upon  his  return  to  Paris,  Jan  g  m_ 
an  assembly  composed  of  prelates,  barons,  and  bur- 
gesses of  that  city,  was  convened,  who  acknowledged  him  as 
their  lawful  sovereign,  and,  if  we  may  believe  an  historian, 
expressly  declared  that  a  woman  was  incapable  of  succeeding 
to  the  crown  of  France.2  The  duke  of  Burgundy,  however, 
made  a  show  of  supporting  his  niece's  interests,  till,  tempted 
by  the  prospect  of  a  marriage  with  the  daughter  of  Philip,  he 
shamefully  betrayed  her  cause,  and  gave  up  in  her  name,  for 
an  inconsiderable  pension,  not  only  her  disputed  claim  to  the 
whole  monarchy,  but  her  unquestionable  right  to  Navarre  and 
Champagne.3  I  have  been  rather  minute  in  stating  these 
details,  because  the  transaction  is  misrepresented  by  every 
Historian,  not  excepting  those  who  have  written  since  the  pub- 
lication of  the  documents  which  illustrate  it.4 

In  this  contest,  every  way  memorable,  but  especially  on 
account  of  that  which  sprung  out  of  it,  the  exclusion  of  females 
from  the  throne  of  France  was  first  publicly  discussed.     The 

i  Ancient    writers,   Sismondi    tells    us  historian   of  this  important  period.     He 

(ix.  344),  do    not   call   this   infant  any-  describes  the  assembly  which  confirmed 

thing  but  the  child  who  was  to  be  king ;  Philip's    possession    of    the     crown;  — 

the  maxim  of  later  times,  "  Le  roi  ne  quamplures  proceres  et  regni  nobiles  ac 

meurt  pas,"  was  unknown.     I  suspect,  magnates  una  cum  plerisque  praelatis  et 

nevertheless,  that  the   strict   hereditary  burgensibus  Parisiensis  civitatis. 

succession^was  better  recognized  before  3Hist.  de  Charles  le  Mauvais,  t.  ii.  p.  6. 

this    time  than   Sismondi   here  admits;  Jaue,  and  her  husband  the  count  of  Ev- 

compare  what  he   says  afterwards  oi  a  reux,  recovered  Navarre,  after  the  death 

period  very  little  later,  vol.  xi.  6.  of  Charles  the  Fair. 

2Tuncetiam  declaratum  fuit,  quod  in  4Velly,    who  gives   several   proofs    of 

regno  Francise  mulier  non  succedit.    Cou-  disingenuousness  in  this  part  of  history, 

tin.      Gul.      Nangis,    in    Spicilegio    d'-  mutilates  the  treaty  of  the  17th  of  July, 

Achery,  torn.  iii.     This   monk,  without  1316,  in  order  to  conceal  Philip  the  Long'i 

talents,   and   probably   without    private  breach  of  faith  towards  his  niece 
Information,   is  the   sole    contemporary 


08  PHILIP  V.  Chai     I.  Pari  1. 

French  writers  almost  unanimously  concur  in  asserting  that 
such  an  exclusion  was  built  upon  a  fundamental  maxim  of 
their  government.  No  written  law,  nor  even,  as  far  as  I 
know,  the  direct  testimony  of  any  ancient  writer,  lias  been 
brought  forward  to  confirm  this  position.  For  as  to  the  text 
of  the  Salic  law,  which  was  frequently  quoted,  and  has  indeed 
.riven  a  name  to  this  exelu-don  of  females,  it  can  only  by  a 
doubtful  and  refined  analogy  be  considered  as  bearing  any 
relation  to  the  succession  of  the  crown.  It  is  certain  never- 
theless that,  from  the  time  of  Ciovis,  no  woman  had  ever 
reigned  in  France  ;  and  although  not  an  instance  of  a  sole 
heiress  had  occurred  before,  yet  some  of  the  Merovingian 
kings  left  daughters,  who  might,  if  not  rendered  incapable  by 
their  sex,  have  shared  with  their  brothers  in  partitions  then 
commonly  made.1  But,  on  the  other  hand,  these  times  were 
gone  quite  out  of  memory,  and  France  had  much  in  the 
analogy  of  her  existing  usages  to  reconcile  her  to  a  female 
reign.  The  crown  resembled  a  great  fief;  and  the  great  fiefs 
might  universally  descend  to  women.  Even  at  the  consecra- 
tion of  Philip  himself,  Maud,  countess  of  Artois,  held  the 
crown  over  his  head  among  the  other  peers.*2  And  it  was 
scarcely  beyond  the  recollection  of  persons  living  that  Blanche 
had  been  legitimate  regent  of  France  during  the  minority  of 
St.  Louis. 

For  these  reasons,  and  much  more  from  the  provisional 
treaty  concluded  between  Philip  and  the  duke  of  Burgundy, 
it  may  be  fairly  inferred  that  the  Salic  law,  as  it  was  called, 
was  not  so  fixed  a  principle  at  that  time  as  has  been  con- 
tended.   But  however  this  may  be,  it  received  at  the  accession 

1  The  treaty  of  Andely,  in  587,  will  be  Thi3   unwise   dishonesty,   which   is   not 

found  to  afford  a  very  strong  presump-  without  parallel  in  more  private  causes, 

tion  that  females  were  at  that  time  ex-  not  only  ruined   his   pretensions   to  the 

eluded  from  reigning  in  France.     Greg,  county  of  Artois,  but  produced  a  seutence 

Turon.  1.  ix.  of  forfeiture,  and  even  of  capital  punish- 

-  The  continuator  of  Nangis  says  indeed  ment,  against  himself.    Sec  a  pretty  good 

of  this,  de  quo  aliqui  indignati  fuerunt.  account,  of  Hubert's  process  iu  Velly,  t. 

But  these  were  probably   the  partisans  viii.  p.  262. 

of  her  nephew  Robert,  who  had  been  Sismondi  (x.  11)  does  not  seem  to  be 

excluded  by  a  judicial  sentence  of  Philip  convinced    that     Hubert   of   Artois    was 

IV.,  on  the  ground  that  the  right  of  rep-  guilty  of  forger  \  ;  but  perhaps  be  is  tod 

pesantation  did  not  take  place  in  Artois ;  away   by    his   animosity   against   kings, 

a  decision  considered  by  many  as  unjust,  especially  those  of  the  house  of  Valois. 

Robert  subsequently  renewed  bis  appeal  M.  Michelet  informs  us  (v.  30)  that  the 

court  of  Philip  of  Valois;  but,  deeds  produced  by  the  demoiselle  Divioi:. 

unhappily    for  himself,  yielded    to  the  on  which  Robert  founded  bis  claims,  arc 

temptation  of  forging  documents  in  sup-  in  the                  ■  Chartes,  and  palpable 

port  of  a  claim  which  seems  to  have  been  forgeries 
at    least    plausible     without    such    aid 


Krancb.  PHILIP  OF  VALOIS.  59 

of  Philip  the  Long  a  sanction  which  subsequent  events  more 
thoroughly    confirmed.     Philip    himself  leaving    only    three 
daughters,  his  brother  Charles  mounted  the  throne  ;  Charles  iv 
and  upon  his  death  the  rule  was  so  unquestionably  AD- 1322. 
established,  that  his  only  daughter  was  excluded  by  phiiip  of 
the  count  of  Valois,  grandson  of  Philip  the  Bold.  Valois- 
This    prince    first    took    the    regency,   the   queen- AD- 1328- 
dowager  being  pregnant,   and,   upon  her  giving   birth   to  a 
daughter,  was  crowned    king.     No   competitor  or   opponent 
appeared    in   France ;  but    one    more  formidable    than    any 
whom  France  could  have  produced  Avas  awaiting  the  occasion 
to  prosecute  his  imagined  right  with  all  the  resources  of  valor 
and  genius,  and  to  carry  desolation  over  that  great  kingdom 
with  as  little  scruple  as  if  he  was  preferring  a  suit  before  a 
civil  tribunal. 

From  tlu  moment  of  Charles  IV.'s  death,  Edward  III.  of 
England  buoyed  himself  up  with  a  notion  of  his  claim  of 
title  to  the  crown  of  France,  in  right  of  his  mother  Edwartini- 
Isabel,  sister  to  the  three  last  kings.  We  can  have  no  hesita 
tion  in  condemning  the  injustice  of  this  pretension.  Whether 
the  Salic  law  were  or  were  not  valid,  no  advantage  could  bo 
gained  by  Edward.  Even  if  he  could  forget  the  express  of 
tacit  decision  of  all  France,  there  stood  in  his  way  Jane,  the 
daughter  of  Louis  X.,  three  of  Philip  the  Long,  and  one  of 
Charles  the  Fair.  Aware  of  this,  Edward  set  up  a  distinction, 
that,  although  females  were  excluded  from  succession,  the 
same  rule  did  not  apply  to  their  male  issue  ;  and  thus,  though 
his  mother  Isabel  could  not  herself  become  queen  of  France, 
she  might  transmit  a  title  to  him.  But  this  was  contrary  to 
the  commonest  rules  of  inheritance  ;  and  if  it  could  have  been 
regarded  at  all,  Jane  had  a  son,  afterwards  the  famous  king 
of  Navarre,  who  stood  one  degree  nearer  to  the  crown  than 
Edward. 

It  is  asserted  in  some  French  authorities  that  Edward  pre- 
ferred a  claim  to  the  regency  immediately  after  the  decease 
of  Charles  the  Fair,  and  that  the  States- General,  or  at  least 
the  peers  of  France,  adjudged  that  dignity  to  Philip  de  Valois. 
Whether  this  be  true  or  not,  it  is  clear  that  he  entertained 
projects  of  recovering  his  right  as  early,  though  his  youth  and 
the  embarrassed  circumstances  of  his  government  threw 
insuperable  obstacles  in  the  way  of  their  execution.1     He  did 

*  Letter  of  Edward  III.  addressed  to    certain  nobles  and  towns  in  the  south  ol 


60 


CLAIM  OF   EDWAKD   III.        Chap.  L  Part  I. 


liege  homage,  therefore,  to  Philip  for  Guienne,  and  for  sev- 
eral years,  while  the  affairs  of  Scotland  engrossed  his  atten- 
tion, gave  no  Bign  of  meditating  a  more  magnificent  enterprise. 
A<  he  advanced  in  manhood,  and  felt  the  consciousness  of  his 
strength,  his  early  designs  grew  mature,  and  produced  a  series 
of  the  most  important  and  interesting  revolutions  in  the 
fortunes  of  France.  These  will  form  the  subject  of  the 
ensuing  pages. 


France,  dated  March  28,  1328,  four  days 
before  the  birth  of  Charles  IV. 's  posthu- 
mous daughter,  iutimates  this  resolutiou. 
Uvmer.  vol.  iv.  p.  344  et  seq.  But  an 
instrument,  dated  at  Northampton  on 
the  16th  of  May,  is  decisive :  This  is  a 
procuration  to  the  bishops  of  Worcester 
and  Litchfield,  to  demand  and  take  pos- 
session of  the  kingdom  of  France,  "  in 
our  name,  which  kingdom  has  devolved 
and  appertains  to  us  as  to  the  right  heir." 
P.  354.  To  this  mission  ai-chbishop 
Stratford  refers,  in  his  vindication  of 
himself  from  Edward's  accusation  of 
treason  in  1340 ;  and  informs  us  that  the 
two  bishops  actually  proceeded  to  France, 
though  without  mentioning  any  further 
particulars.  Novitenim  qui  nihil  ignorat, 
quod  cum  quaestio  de  regno  Francia?  post 
mortem  regis  Caroli,  fratris  serenissimae 
oiatris  vestrae,  in  parliamento  tunc  apud 
Northampton  celebrato,  tractata  discus- 
saque  fuisset  ;  quodque  idem  regnum 
Francias  ad  vos  haereditario  jure  extite- 
rat  legitime  devolutum  ;  et  super  hoc 
fuit  ordinatum,  quod  duo  episcopi,  Wig- 
orniensistunc,  nuncautem  Wintoniensis. 
ac  Coven  trieusis  et  Lichfeldensis  in  Fran- 
ciam  dirigerent  gressus  suos,  nomineque 
vestro  reguum  Francioe  vindicareut  et 
praedicti  Philippi  de  Valesio  coronationem 
pro  viribus  impedirent;  qui  juxta  ordi- 
natiouem  praedictam  legationem  iis  in- 
junctani  tunc  assumentes,  gressus  suos 
versus  Franciam  direxerunt ;  quae  qui- 
dem  legatio  maximam  guerrae  praesentis 
materiam  miuistravit.  Wilkins,  Concilia, 
t.  i  p.  664. 

There  is  no  evidence  in  Rymer's  Fce- 
dera  to  corroborate  Edward's  supposed 
darn  to  the  regen/sy  of  France  upon  the 


death  of  Charles  IV. ;  and  it  is  certainly 
suspicious  that  no  appointment  of  am- 
bassadore  or  procurators  for  this  purpose 
should  appear  in  so  complete  a  collection 
of  documents.  The  French  historians 
generally  assert  this,  upon  the  authority 
of  the  continuator  of  William  of  Nangis, 
a  nearly  contemporary,  but  not  always 
well-informed  writer.  It  is  curious  to 
compare  the  four  chief  English  historians. 
Rapin  affirms  both  the  claim  to  the  re- 
gency on  Charles  IV. 's  death,  and  that 
to  the  kingdom  after  the  birth  of  his 
daughter.  Carte,  the  most  exact  his- 
torian we  have,  mentions  the  latter,  and 
is  silent  as  to  the  former.  Hume  passes 
over  both,  and  iutimates  that  Edward 
did  not  take  any  steps  in  support  of  his 
pretensions  in  1328.  Henry  gives  the 
supposed  trial  of  Edward's  claim  to  the 
regency  before  the  States-General  at  great 
length,  and  makes  no  allusion  to  the 
other,  so  indisputably  authenticated  in 
Ryiner.  It  is,  I  think,  most  probable 
that  the  two  bishops  never  made  the 
formal  demand  of  the  throne  as  they  were 
directed  by  their  instructions.  Stratford's 
expressions  seem  to  imply  that  they  did 
not. 

Sismoudi  does  not  mention  the  claim 
of  Edward  to  the  regency  after  the  death 
of  Charles  IV.,  though  he  supposes  his 
pretensions  to  have  been  taken  into  con 
sideration  by  the  lords  and  doctors  of 
law,  whom  he  asserts,  following  the  con- 
tinuator of  William  of  Nangis,  to  have 
consulted  together,  before  Philip  of  Valois 
took  the  title  of  regent.  (Vol.  x.  p.  10  J 
Michelet,  more  studious  of  effect  than 
minute  in  details,  iuak*s  no  allusion  tf 
the  subject. 


FllAACE. 


HIS   WAK   IN    FRANCE.  61 


PART   II. 

War  of  Edward  Til.  in  Prance  —  Causes  of  his  Success  —  Civil  Disturlancea  of 
France  —  Peace  of  Bretigni  —  its  interpretation  considered—  Charles  V.  —  .1* 
uewal  of  the  War  —  Charles  VI.  —  his  Minority  and  Insanity  —  Civil  Dissensions 
of  the  Parties  of  Orleans  and  Burgundy  —  Assassination  of  both  these  Prince* 

—  Intrigues  of  their  Parties  with  England  under  Henry  IV.  —  Henry  V.  invade* 
France  —  Treaty  of  Troves—  State  of  France  i:i    the  first  Years  of  Charles  VII. 

—  Progress   aud   subsequent   decline   of    the    English    Arms  — their    Expulsion 
from  France  —  Change  in  the  Political  Constitution— Louis  XI.— his  Character 

—  Leagues  formed  against  him  —  Charles  Duke  of -Burgundy —his  Prosperity 
and  Fall  — Louis  obtains  possession  of  Burgundy —his  Death  — Charles  VIII.— 

—  Acquisition  of  Britany. 

No  war  had  broken  out  in  Europe,  since  the  fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  so  memorable  as  that  of  Edward  War  of 
III.  and  his  successors  against  France,  whether  we  Edward  in. 
consider  its  duration,  its  object,  or  the  magnitude  m  France" 
and  variety  of  its  events.  It  was  a  struggle  of  one  hundred 
and  twenty  years,  interrupted  but  once  by  a  regular  pacifica- 
tion, where  the  most  ancient  and  extensive  dominion  in  the 
civilized  world  was  the  prize,  twice  lost  and  twice  recovered, 
in  the  conflict,  while  individual  courage  was  wrought  up  to 
that  high  pitch  which  it  can  seldom  display  since  the  regulari- 
ty of  modern  tactics  has  chastised  its  enthusiasm  and  levelled 
its  distinctions.  There  can  be  no  occasion  to  dwell  upon  the 
events  of  this  war,  which  are  familiar  to  almost  every  reader  : 
it  is  rather  my  aim  to  develop  and  arrange  those  circum- 
stances which,  when  rightly  understood,  give  the  clue  to  its 
various  changes  of  fortune. 

Fiance  was,  even  in  the  fourteenth  century,  a  kingdom  of 
such  extent  and  compactness  of  figure,  such  popu-  Causes  of 
lation  and  resources,  and  filled  with  so  spirited  a  his  succe8^ 
nobility,  that  the    very  idea  of   subjugating  it  by  a  foreign 
force  must  have  seemed  the  most  extravagant  dream  of  am- 
bition.1    Yet,  in  the  course  of  about  twenty  years  of  war, 

l  The  pope  (Benedict  XII.)  wrote  a  were  very  subservient  to  France.  Clem- 
rtrong  letter  to  Edward  (March,  1340).  mt  VI..  as  well  as  his  predecessor,  Ben- 
dissuading  him  from  taking  the  title  and  edict  XII.,  threatened  Edward  with 
arms  of  France,  and  pointing  out  the  spiritual  arms.  Rymer,  t.  v.  p.  88  and 
impossibility  of  his  ever  succeeding.  I  465.  It  required  Edward's  spirit  and 
have  no  doubt  but  that  this  was  the  com-  steadiness  to  despise  these  menaces.  But 
mon  opinion.     But  the    Avignon    popes  the    time    when    they    were    terrible   tc 


62    EDWARD  III.  AND  THE  BLACK  PRINCE.    Chap.  I  1'ai'j  II 

this  mighty  nation  was  reduced  to  the  lowest  state  of  exhaus- 
tion, and  dismembered  of  considerable  provinces  by  an  igno- 
minious peace.     What  was  the  combination  of  political  can 

which  brought  about  so  strange  a  revolution,  and,  though  not 
realizing  Edward's  hopes  to  their  extent,  redeemed  them  from 
the  imputation  of  rashness  in  the  judgment  of*  his  own  and 
succeeding  ages  ? 

The  first  advantage  which  Edward  III.  possessed  in  this 
character  of  coutesl  ur;is  derived  from  the  splendor  of  his  per- 
Rdwardin.  sunal  character  and  from  the  still  more  eminent 
virtues  of  his  son.  Besides  prudence  and  military 
skill,  these  great  princes  were  endowed  with  qualities  peculiar- 
ly fitted  for  the  times  in  which  they  lived.  Chivalry  was  then 
in  its  zenith;  and  in  all  the  virtues  which  adorned  the  knight- 
ly character,  in  courtesy,  munificence,  gallantry,  in  all  deli- 
cate and  magnanimous  feelings,  none  were  so  conspicuous  as 
Edward  III.  and  the  Black  Prince.  As  later  princes  have 
boasted  of  being  the  best  gentlemen,  they  might  claim  to  be 
the  pro  west  knights  in  Europe  —  a  character  not  quite  dis- 
similar, yet  of  more  high  pretension.  Their  court  was,  as 
it  were,  the  sun  of  that  system  which  embraced  the  valor  and 
nobility  of  the  Christian  world  ;  and  the  respect  which  was 
felt  for  their  excellences,  while  it  drew  many  to  their  side, 
mitigated  in  all  the  rancor  and  ferociousness  of  hostility. 
This  war  was  like  a  great  tournament,  where  the  combatants 
fought  indeed  a  outrance,  but  with  all  the  courtesy  and  fair 
play  of  such  an  entertainment,  and  almost  as  much  for  the 
honor  of  their  ladies.  In  the  school  of  the  Edwards  were 
formed  men  not  inferior  in  any  nobleness  of  disposition  to 
their  masters  —  Manni  and  the  Captal  de  Buch,  Knollys  and 
Calverley,  Chandos  and  Lancaster.  On  the  French  side, 
especially  after  Du  Guesclin  came  on  the  stage,  these  had 
rivals  almost  equally  deserving  of  renown.  If  we  could  for- 
get, what  never  should  be  forgotten,  the  wretchedness  and 
devastation  that  fell  upon  a  great  kingdom,  too  dear  a  price 
for  the  display  of  any  heroism,  we  might  count  these  English 
wars  in  France  among  the  brightest  periods  in  history. 

Philip  of  Valois,  and  John  his  son,  showed  but  poorly  in 
'i.'iI'-^yY  of  compai"ison  with  their  illustrious  enemies.  Yet 
d.uijohn!       they  both    had    considerable    virtues;    they    were 

princes  wan  rather  passed  by  :  and  the    out  his  reign,  with  admirable   nrnineei 
Holy  See  never  ventured  to  provoke  the    and  temper. 
kio4f,  who  treated  tbe  church,  throu 


•Tkanck.  RESOURCES  OF  EDWARD  III.  63 

brave,1  just,  liberal,  and  the  latter,  in  particular,  of  un- 
shaken fidelity  to  his  word.  But  neither  was  beloved  by 
his  subjects ;  the  misgovernment  and  extortion  of  their  pred- 
ecessors during  half  a  century  had  alienated  the  public 
mind,  and  rendered  their  own  taxes  and  debasement  of  the 
coin  intolerable.  Philip  was  made  by  misfortune,  John  by 
nature,  suspicious  and  austere ;  and  although  their  most 
violent  acts  seem  never  to  have  wanted  absolute  justice,  yet 
they  were  so  ill-conducted,  and  of  so  arbitrary  a  complexion, 
that  they  greatly  impaired  the  reputation,  as  well  as  interests, 
of  these  monarchs.  In  the  execution  of  Clisson  under  Philip, 
in  that  of  the  Connetable  d'Eu  under  John,  and  still  more  in 
that  of  Harcourt,  even  in  the  imprisonment  of  the  king  of 
Navarre,  though  every  one  of  these  might  have  been  guilt}' 
of  treasons,  there  were  circumstances  enough  to  exasperate 
the  disaffected,  and  to  strengthen  the  party  of  so  politic  a 
competitor  as  Edward. 

Next   to   the  personal  qualities  of   the   king  of   England. 
his  resources  in  this  war  must  be  taken  into  the  Resources 
account.      It    was   after   long   hesitation    that   he oi  ^e£iu° 
as>umed  the  title  and  arms  of  France,  from  which, 
unless  upon  the  best  terms,  he  could  not  recede  without  loss 
of  honor.2     In  the  mean  time   he  strengthened  himself  bj 

1  The  bravery  of  Philip  is  not  ques-  curation  to  the  duke  of  Brabant.  Oc- 
tioned.  But  a  French  historian,  in  order,  tober  7,  1337,  empowering  him  to  take 
I  suppose,  to  enhance  this  quality,  has  possession  of  the  crown  of  France  in  the 
presumed  to  violate  truth  in  an  extraor-  name  of  Edward  ;  attendentes  inclitum 
dinary  manner.  The  challenge  sent  by  regnum  Francise  ad  nos  fore  jure  succes- 
Edward,  offering  to  decide  his  claim  to  sionis  legitime  devolutum.  Another  of 
the  kingdom  by  single  combat,  is  well  the  same  date  appoints  the  said  duke  his 
known.  Certainly  it  conveys  no  imputa-  vicar-general  and  lieutenant  of  France 
tion  on  the  king  of  France  to  have  de-  The  king  assumed  in  this  commission 
clined  this  unfair  proposal.  But  Velly  the  title  Rex  Francias  et  Anglise ;  in 
bus  represented  him  as  accepting  it,  on  other  instruments  he  calls  himself  Rex 
condition  that  Edward  would  stake  the  Anglise  et  Francise.  It  was  necessary  to 
crown  of  England  against  that  of  France ;  obviate  the  jealousy  of  the  English,  who 
an  interpolation  which  may  be  truly  did  not,  in  that  age,  admit  the  precedence 
called  audacious,  since  not  a  word  of  this  of  France.  Accordingly,  Edward  had 
is  in  Philip's  letter,  preserved  in  Rymer,  two  great  seals  on  which  the  two  king- 
which  the  historian  had  before  his  eyes,  doms  were  named  in  a  different  order, 
and  actually  quotes  upon  the  occasion.  But,  in  the  royal  arms,  those  of  Franca 
Hist,  de  France,  t.  viii.  p.  382.  were  always  in  the  first  quarter,  as  they 

2  The  first  instrument  in  which  Ed-  continued  to  be  until  the  accession  of 
ward  disallows  the  title  of  Philip  is  his  the  house  of  Brunswick, 
convention  with  the  emperor  Louis  of  Probably  Edward  III.  would  not  have 
Bavaria,  wherein  he  calls  him  nunc  pro  entered  into  the  war  merely  on  account 
rege  Francorum  se  gerentem.  The  date  of  his  claim  to  the  crown.  He  had  die* 
of  this  is  August  26,  1337,  yet  on  the  putes  with  Philip  about  Guienne ;  and 
28th  of  the  same  month  another  instru-  that  prince  had,  rather  unjustifiably, 
ment  gives  him  the  tit  e  of  king;  and  abetted  Robert  Bruce  in  Scotland.  lam 
the  same  occurs  in  subsequent  instances,  not  inclined  to  lay  any  material  stresi 
At  length  we  have  an  instrument  of  pro-  upon  the  instigation  of  Robert  of  Artois 


64  THE  ENGLISH   AUMIKS.       Chap.  I.  Fart  ii. 

alliances  with  the  emperor,  with  (he  cities  of  Flanders,  ami 
with  most  of  the  princes  in  the  Netherlands  and  on  the 
Rhine.  Yet  I  do  not  know  that  he  profited  much  by  these 
conventions,  since  he  met  with  no  success  till  the  scene  of 
the  war  was  changed  from  the  Flemish  frontier  to  Normandy 
and  Poitou.  The  troops  of  Hainault  alone  were  constantly 
distinguished  in  his  service.1 

But  his  intrinsic  strength  was  at  home.  England  had 
been  growing  in  riches  since  the  wise  government  of  his 
grandfather,  Edward  I.,  and  through  the  market  opened  for 
her  wool  with  the  manufacturing  towns  of  Flanders.  She 
was  tranquil  within  ;  and  her  northern  enemy,  the  Scotch, 
had  been  defeated  and  quelled.  The  parliament,  after  some 
slight  precautions  against  a  very  probable  effect  of  Edward's 
conquest  of  France,  the  reduction  of  their  own  island  into  a 
province,  entered,  as  warmly  as  improvidently,  into  his  quar- 
rel. The  people  made  it  their  own,  and  grew  so  intoxicated 
with  the  victories  of  this  war,  that  for  some  centuries  the  in- 
justice and  folly  of  the  enterprise  do  not  seem  to  have  struck 
the  gravest  of  our  countrymen. 

There  is,  indeed,  ample  room  for  national  exultation  at  the 
names  of  Crecy,  Poitiers,  and  Azincourt.  So  great 
ofXtheeDCe  was  the  disparity  of  numbers  upon  those  famous 
English  days,  that  we  cannot,  with  the  French  historians, 

attribute  the  discomfiture  of  their  hosts  merely  to 
mistaken  tactics  and  too  impetuous  valor.  They  yielded 
rather  to  that  intrepid  steadiness  in  danger  which  had  already 
become  the  characteristic  of  our  English  soldiers,  and  which, 
during  five  centuries,  has  insured  their  superiority,  whenever 
ignorance  or  infatuation  has  not  led  them  into  the  field.     But 


i  Michelet  dwells  on  the  advantage  "  Une  tactique  nouvelle,"  M.  Michelet 
which  Edward  gained  by  the  commerce  afterwards  very  well  observes  (p.  81), 
of  England  with  Flanders:  "Le  secret  "  sortait  de  l'etat  nouveau  de  la  societe  ; 
des  batailles  de  Crecy,  de  Poitiers,  est  ce  n'etait  pas  un  ceuvre  de  genie,  ni  de 
aux  comptoirs  des  marchands  de  Londres,  reflexion.  Edouard  111.  n'etait  ni  un 
de  Bordeaux,  et  de  Bourges  "  (vol.  v.  p.  Gustave  Adolphe  ni  an  Frederic  H.  II 
6).  France  had  no  internal  trade  :  the  avaif  employe  lea  fantas.-ins  faute  de 
roads  were  dangerous  on  account  of  roll-  cavaliers.  ...  La  bataille  de  Crecy 
bers.  and  heavy  tolls  were  to  be  paid;  reveilla  un  secret  dont  personne  ne  se 
fiscal  officers  had  replaced  the  feudal  doutait.  I'impuissance  militaire  de  ce 
lords.  The  value  of  money  was  per-  inonde  feodal,  qui  s'efait  cru  Le  seul 
petually  varying  far  more  than  in  Eng-  inonde  militaire."  Courtray might  have 
land.  (Id.  p.  12.)  Certainly  the  com-  given  some  suspicion  of  this ;  hut  Com- 
parative prosperity  of  the  latter  country  tray  was  much  less  of  a  "  bataille  range*  " 
supplied  Edward  with  the  sinews  of  than  Crecy. 
war.  France  could  not  afford  to  main- 
tain a  well-appointed  infantry 


France  CONDITION   OF   FRANCE.  65 

these  victories,  and  the  qualities  that  secured  them,  must 
chiefly  be  ascribed  to  the  freedom  of  our  constitution,  and  to 
the  superior  condition  of  the  people.  Not  the  nobility  of 
England,  not  the  feudal  tenants  won  the  battles  of  Crecy  and 
Poitiers  ;  for  these  were  fully  matched  in  the  ranks  of  France ; 
but  the  yeomen  who  drew  the  bow  with  strong  and  steady 
arms,  accustomed  to  use  it  in  their  native  fields,  and  rendered 
fearless  by  personal  competence  and  civil  freedom.  It  is  well 
known  that  each  of  the  three  great  victories  was  due  to  our 
archers,  who  were  chiefly  of  the  middle  class,  and  attached, 
according  to  the  system  of  that  age,  to  the  knights  and  squires 
who  fought  in  heavy  armor  with  the  lance.  Even  at  the 
battle  of  Poitiers,  of  which  our  country  seems  to  have  the 
least  right  to  boast,  since  the  greater  part  of  the  Black 
Prince's  small  army  was  composed  of  Gascons,  the  merit  of 
the  English  bowmen  is  strongly  attested  by  Froissart.1 

Yet  the  glorious  termination  to  which  Edward  was  enabled, 
at  least  for  a  time,  to  bring  the  contest,  was  rather  Coudition 
the  work  of  fortune  than  of  valor  and  prudence.  2Jrr™ 
Until    the    battle    of    Poitiers   he    had    made    no  battle  of 
progress  towards  the  conquest  of  France.     That  Poitiers, 
country  was  too  vast,  and  his  army  too  small,  for  such  a  rev- 
olution.    The  victory  of  Crecy  gave  him  nothing  but  Calais  , 
a   post   of  considerable   importance   in   war   and   peace,  but 
rather  adapted  to  annoy  than  to  subjugate  the  kingdom.     But 
at    Poitiers    he   obtained   the   greatest   of  prizes,  by  taking 
prisoner  the  king  of  France.     Not  only  the  love  of  freedom 
tempted  that  prince  to  ransom  himself  by  the  utmost  sacrifices, 
but  his  captivity  left  France  defenceless,  and  seemed  to  anni- 
hilate   the  monarchy   itself.     The   government  was    already 
odious  ;  a  spirit  was  awakened   in   the   people  which  might 

l  Au  vray  dire,  les  archres   d'Angle-  "  Par  un  effort  tie  lance  et  d'ecu, 

terre  faisoient  a  leurs  gens  grant  avan-  Conquerant  tous  ses  ennemis, 

tage.     Car  ils  tiroyent  tant  espessement.  Y  a  arbalestreis  ni  fu  mis ; 
que  les   Francois   ne   scavoyent    dequel 

eoste   entendre,  qu'ils   ne   fussent  con-  quoted  by  Boucher  in  his  translation  of 

suvvis   de  trayt;  et  s'avaucoyent  tous-  ;  II  Consolato  del  Mare,'  p.  018.     fcven  the 

jours  ces  Anglois.  et  petit  a  petit  enque-  long-bow  might  incur  this  censure;  or 

invent  terre      Part  I.e.  162.  any  weapon  m   which   the   combatants 

It  is  bv  an  odd  oversight  that  Sismondi  fought  eminus.     But  if  we  look  at  the 

baa  said  (\.  295).  "Les  Anglais  etaient  plate-armor  of  the  fifteenth  century,  it 

uccoutumes  a  se  servir  sans  cesse  de  Par-  may  seem  that  a  knight  had  not  much 

Uilete  "    The  cross-bow  was  looked  upon  to  boast  of  the  danger  to  wmch  he  ex- 

as  a  weapon  unworthy  of  a  brave  man  ;  posed  himself,  especially  when  encounter 

h.  prejudice  which  afterwards  prevailed  ing  infantry, 
with  respect  to  fire-arms.     A  romancer 
praises  the  emperor  Conrad, 

VOL.  I.  —  M.  6 


b6  CONDITION  OF   FRANCE        Chap.  I.  Part  H 

seem  hardly  to  belong  to   (he  fourteenth  century;  and   the 

convulsion-  of  our  own  time  arc  sometimes  strongly  paralleled 
by  those  which  succeeded  the  battle  of  Poitiers.  Already  the 
States-General  had  established  a  fundamental  principle,  that 
no  resolution  could  be  passed  as  the  opinion  of  the  whole 
unless  each  of  the  three  orders  concurred  in  its  adoption.1 
The  right  of  levying  and  of  regulating  the  collection  of  taxi- 
was  recognize*1.  But  that  assembly,  which  met  at  Pari* 
immediately  after  the  battle,  went  far  greater  length-  in  tie- 
reform  and  control  of  government.  From  the  time  of  Philip 
the  Fair  the  abuses  natural  to  arbitrary  power  had  harassed 
the  people.  There  now  seemed  an  opportunity  of  redress  ; 
and  however  seditious,  or  even  treasonable,  may  have  been 
the  motives  of  those  who  guided  this  assembly  of  the  States, 
especially  the  famous  Marcel,  it  is  clear  that  man)'  of  their 
v  reformations  tended  to  liberty  and  the  public  good.'2  But  the 
tumultuous  scenes  which  passed  in  the  capital,  sometimes 
heightened  into  civil  war,  necessarily  distracted  men  from 
the  common  defence  against  Edward.  These  tumults  were 
excited,  and  the  distraction  increased,  by  Charles  king  of 
Navarre,  surnamed  the  Bad,  to  whom  the  French  writers 
have,  not  perhaps  unjustly,  attributed  a  character  of  unmixed 
and  inveterate  malignity.  He  was  grandson  of  Louis  Hutin, 
by  his  daughter  Jane,  and,  if  Edward's  pretence  of  claiming 
through  females,  could  be  admitted,  was  a  nearer  heir  to  the 
crown  ;  the  consciousness  of  which  seems  to  have  suggested 
itself  to  his  depraved  mind  as  an  excuse  for  his  treacheries, 
though  he  could  entertain  very  little  prospect  of  asserting  the 
claim  against  either  contending  party.  John  had  bestowed 
his  daughter  in  marriage  on  the  king  of  Navarre  ;  but  he 
very  soon  gave  a  p. roof  of  his  character  by  procuring  the 
assassination  of  the  king's  favorite,  Charles  de  la  Cerda.  An 
irreconcileable  enmity  was  the  natural  result  of  this  crime 
Charles  became  aware  that  he  had  offended  beyond  the  possi- 
bility of  forgiveness,  and  that  no  letters  of  pardon,  nor  pre- 
tended reconciliation,  could  secure  him  from  the  king's  resent- 
ment. Thus,  impelled  by  guilt  into  deeper  guilt,  he  entered 
into  alliances  with  Edward,  and  fomented  the  seditious  spirit 
of  Paris.     Eloquent  and  insinuating,  he  was  the  favorite  of  the 

1  Ordonnanccs  des  Kois  de  France,  t.  ii.  but  it  arose  indispensably  out  of  my  ar- 

-   i  must  refer  the  reader  onward  to  the  ranjjement   and  prevented  greater  incon- 

-i'jxt  chapter  for  more  information  on  this  veniences 

subject.    This  separation  is  inconvenient. 


France.  AFTER  THE  BATTLE  OF  POITIERS.  67 

people,  whose  grievances  he  affected  to  pity,  and  with  whose 
leaders  he  intrigued.  As  his  paternal  inheritance,  he  pos- 
sessed the  county  of  Evreux  in  Normandy.  The  proximity 
of  this  to  Paris  created  a  formidable  diversion  in  favor  of 
Edward  III.,  and  connected  the  English  garrisons  of  the 
North  with  those  of  Poitou  and  Guienne. 

There  is  no  affliction  which  did  not  fall  upon  France  during 
this  miserable  period.  A  foreign  enemy  was  in  the  heart  of 
the  kingdom,  the  king  a  prisoner,  the  capital  in  sedition,  a 
treacherous  prince  of  the  blood  in  arms  against  the  sovereign 
authority.  Famine,  the  sure  and  terrible  companion  of  war, 
for  several  years  desolated  the  country.  In  1 348  a  pestilence, 
the  most  extensive  and  unsparing  of  which  we  have  any 
memorial,  visited  France  as  well  as  the  rest  of  Europe,  and 
consummated  the  work  of  hunger  and  the  sword.1  The  com- 
panies of  adventure,  mercenary  troops  in  the  service  of  John 
or  Edward,  finding  no  immediate  occupation  after  the  truce 
of  1357,  scattered  themselves  over  the  country  in  search  of 
pillage.  No  force  existed  sufficiently  powerful  to  check  these 
robbers  in  their  career.  Undismayed  by  superstition,  they 
compelled  the  pope  to  redeem  himself  in  Avignon  by  the 
payment  of  forty  thousand  crowns.2  France  was  the  passive 
victim  of  their  license,  even  after  the  pacification  concluded 
with  England,  till  some  were  diverted  into  Italy,  and  others 
led  by  I)u  Guesclin  to  the  war  of  Castile.     Impatient  of  this 

1  A  full  account  of  the  ravages  made  five  millions  who  died  of  the  former 
by  this  memorable  plague  may  be  found  plague  in  France  merely  diminished  the 
in  Matteo  Villain,  the  second  of  that  number  of  the  oppressed,  producing  no 
family  who  wrote  the  history  of  Florence,  perceptible  effect.  But  this  is  exagger- 
His  brother  and  predecessor,  John  Vil-  ated.  The  plague  caused  a  truc-3  of 
lani.  was  himself  a  victim  to  it.  The  several  months.  The  war  was  in  fact 
disease  began  in  the  Levant  about  1346  ;  carried  on  with  less  vigor  for  some  years. 
from  whence  Italian  tradei-s  brought  it  It  is,  however,  by  no  means  unlikely 
to  Sicily,  Pisa,  and  Genoa.  In  1348  it  that  the  number  of  deaths  has  been  over- 
passed the  Alps  and  spread  over  France  rated.  Nothing  can  be  more  loose  than 
and  Spain  ;  in  the  next  year  it  reached  the  statistical  evidence  of  mediasval 
Britain,  and  in  1350  laid  waste  Germany  writers.  Thus  30,000  are  said  to  have 
and  other  northern  states;  lasting  gen-  died  at  Narbonne.  (Michelet,  v.  94.) 
erally  about  five  months  in  each  country.  But  had  Narbonne  so  many  to  lose  ?  At 
At  Florence  more  than  three  out  of  five  least,  would  not  the  depopulation  have 
died.  Muratori.  Script.  Rerum  Italica-  been  out  of  all  proportion  to  other  cities? 
rum,  t.  xiv.  p.  12.  The  stories  of  Boc-  2  Froissart,  p.  187.  This  troop  of  ban- 
caccio's  Decamerone,  as  is  well  known,  are  ditti  was  commanded  by  Arnaud  do  Cer 
supposed  to  be  related  by  a  society  of  vole,  surnamed  l'Archiprfitre,  from  a  ben- 
Florentine  ladies  and  gentlemen  retired  efice  which,  although  a  layman,  he  pos- 
to  the  country  during  this  pestilence.  sessed.  according  to  the  irregularity  of 

Another  pestilence,  only  less  destruc-  those  ages.     See  a  memoir  on  the  life  of 

tive  than  the  former,  wasted  both  France  Arnaud  de  Cervole,  in  the  twenty-fifth 

and  England  in  1361.     Sismondi  bitterly  volume  of  the  Academy  of  Inscriptions 
remarks  (x.  342)  that  between  four  and 


68  PEACE  OF    BRETIGNI.        Chap.  I.  1'abt  1. 

wretchedness,  and  stung  by  the  insolence  and  luxury  of  their 
lords,  the  peasantry  of  several  districts  broke  out 
into  a  dreadful  insurrection.  This  was  called  the 
Jacquerie,  from  the  cant  phrase  Jacques  Bonhomme,  applied 
to  men  of  that  class  ;  and  was  marked  by  all  the  circumstances 
of  honor  incident  to  the  rising  of  an  exasperated  and  unen- 
lightened populace.1 

Subdued  by  these  misfortunes,  though  Edward  had  made 
Peace  of  but  slight  progress  towards  the  conquest  of  the 
Bretigm.  country,  the  regent  of  France,  afterwards  Charles 
V.,  submitted  to  the  peace  of  Bretigni.  By  this  treaty,  not  to 
mention  less  important  articles,  all  Guienne,  Gaseony,  Poitou, 
1360  Saintonge,  the  Limousin,  and  the  Angoumois,  as 
well  as  Calais,  and  the  county  of  Ponthieu,  were 
ceded  in  full  sovereignty  to  Edward  ;  a  price  abundantly  com- 
pensating his  renunciation  of  the  title  of  France,  which  was  the 
sole  concession  stipulated  in  return.  Every  ear*'  seems  to 
have  been  taken  to  make  the  cession  of  these  provinces  com- 
plete. The  first  six  articles  of  the  treaty  expressly  surrender 
them  to  the  king  of  England.  By  the  seventh,  John  and  his 
non    engaged    to    convey   within    a    year    from    the  ensuing 


l  The  second  continuator  of  Nangis,  a  must  add  that  the  celebrated  story  of  the 

monk  of  no  great  abilities,  but  entitled  six  citizens  of  Calais,  wbich  has  of  late 

to  notice  as  our  most  contemporary  his-  been  called  in  question,  receives  strong 

torian,  charges  the  nobility  with  spend-  confirmation  from  John  Villain,  who  died 

ing  the  money  raised  upon  the  people  by  very  soon  afterwards.    L.  xii.  c.  96.    Frois- 

oppressive  taxes,  in  playing  at  dice,  •' et  sart  of  course  wrought  up  the  circum- 

alios  indecentes  jocos."    D'Achery,  Spici-  stances  after   this   manner.     In  all  the 

legium,  t.  iii.  p.  114  (folio  edition).     All  coloring  of  his   history  he  is  as  great  a 

the  miseries  that  followed  the  battle  of  master  as  Livy,  and  as  little  observant 

Poitiers  he  ascribes  to  bad  government  of  particular  truth.     M.  de  Brequigny, 

and   neglect   of   the   commonweal  :    but  almost  the  latest  of  those  excellent  an- 

especially  to  the  pride  and  luxury  of  the  tiquaries  whose  memoirs  so  much  illus- 

nobles.     I  am  aware  that  this  writer  is  trate    the    French  Academy   of  Inscrip- 

biassed  in  favor  of  the  king  of  Navarre  ;  fcions,  has  discussed  the  history  of  Calais, 

but  he  was  an  eye-witness  of  the  people's  and  particularly  this  remarkable  portion 

misery,  and  perhaps  a  less  exceptionable  of  it.     Mem.  de  l'Academie  des  Inscrip- 

authority  than  Froissart,  whose  love  of  tions   t.  i. 

pageantry  and  habits  of  feasting  in  the  Petrarch  has  drawn  a  lamentable  pic- 
castles  of  the  great  seem  to  have  produced  ture  of  the  state  of  France  in  1360,  when 
some  insensibility  towards  the  sufferings  he  paid  a  visit  to  Paris.  I  could  not 
of  the  lower  classes.  It  is  a  painful  cir-  believe,  lie  says,  that  this  was  the  same 
cumstance,  which  Froissart  and  the  con-  kingdom  which  T  had  once  seen  so  rich 
tinuator  of  Nangis  attest,  that  the  citizens  and  flourishing.  Nothing  presented  itself 
of  Calais,  more  interesting  than  the  com-  to  my  eyes  but  a  fearful  solitude,  an  ex- 
mon  heroes  of  history,  were  unrewarded,  treme  poverty,  lands  uncultivated,  houses 
and  begged  their  bread  in  misery  through-  in  ruins.  Even  the  neighborhood  of 
out  Frame  Villaret  contradicts  this,  on  Paris  manifested  everywhere  marks  of 
the  authority  of  an  ordinance  which  he  destruction  and  conflagration.  The  streets 
has  seen  in  their  favor.  But  that  was  are  deserted;  the  roads  overgrown  with 
not  a  time  when  ordinances  were  very  weeds:  the  whole  is  a  vast  solitude 
*ure  of  execution.     Vill.  t.  tx.  p.  470.     I  Mem.  de  Petrarque,  t.  iii.  p.  641. 


France.  PEACE  OF  BRETIGNI.  6^ 

Michaelmas  all  their  rights  over  them,  and  especially  those 
of  sovereignty  and  feudal  appeal.  The  same  words  are  re- 
peated still  more  emphatically  in  the  eleventh  and  some 
other  articles.  The  twelfth  stipulates  the  exchange  of  mu 
tual  renunciations;  by  John,  of  all  right  over  the  ceded 
countries ;  by  Edward,  of  his  claim  to  the  throne  of  France. 
At  Calais  the  treaty  of  Bretigni  was  renewed  by  John,  who, 
as  a  prisoner,  had  been  no  party  to  the  former  compact,  with 
the  omission  only  of  the  twelfth  article,  respecting  the  ex- 
change of  renunciations.  But  that  it  was  not  intended  to 
waive  them  by  this  omission  is  abundantly  manifest  by  instru- 
ments of  both  the  kings,  in  which  reference  is  made  to  their  fu- 
ture interchanges  at  Bruges,  on  the  feast  of  St.  Andrew,  1361. 
And,  until  that  time  should  arrive,  Edward  promises  to  lay 
aside  the  title  and  arms  of  France  (an  engagement  which  he 
strictly  kept1 ),  and  John  to  act  in  no  respect  as  king  or 
suzerain  over  the  ceded  provinces.  Finally,  on  November 
15,  1361,  two  commissioners  are  appointed  by  Edward  to  re- 
ceive the  renunciations  of  the  kinoj  of  France  at  Bruges  on 
the  ensuing  feast  of  St.  Andrew,2  and  to  do  whatever  might 
be  mutually  required  by  virtue  of  the  treaty.  These,  how- 
ever, seem  to  have  been  withheld,  and  the  twelfth  article  of 
'."he  treaty  of  Bretigni  was  never  expressly  completed.  By 
aautual  instruments,  executed  at  Calais,  October  24,  it  had 
oeen  declared  that  the  sovereignty  of  the  ceded  provinces,  as 
well  as  Edward's  right  to  the  crown  of  France,  should  remain 
as  before,  although  suspended  as  to  its  exercise,  until  the  ex- 
change of  renunciations,  notwithstanding  any  words  of  present 
conveyance  or  release  in  the  treaties  of  Bretigni  and  Calais. 
And  another  pair  of  letters-patent,  dated  October  26,  contains 
the  form  of  renunciations,  which,  it  is  mutually  declared, 
should  have  effect  by  virtue  of  the  present  letters,  in  case  one 
party  should  be  ready  to  exchange  such  renunciations  at  the 
time  and  place  appointed,  and  the  other  should  make  default 
therein.  These  instruments  executed  at  Calais  are  so  prolix, 
and  so  studiously  enveloped,  as  it  seems,  in  the  obscurity  of 
technical  language,  that  it  is  difficult  to  extract  their  precise 
intention.  It  appears,  nevertheless,  that  whichever  party  was 
prepared  to  perform  what  was  required  of  him  at  Bruges  on 

I  Edward  gives  John  the  title  of  King    vi.  p.  217.     The  treaty  was  signed  Ootc 
of  France  in  an  instrument  bearing  date    ber  24.     Id.  p.  219. 
at  Calais,  October  22,  1360.     Rymer,  t.        2  Rym.  t.  vi.  p.  339 


70 


PEACE  OF  BRETIGNI.         Chap.  I.  Pabt  ix. 


November  30,  1361,  the  other  then  and  there  making  default, 
would  acquire  not  only  what  our  lawyers  might  call  an 
equitable  title,  but  an  actual  vested  right,  by  virtue  of  the 
provision  in  the  letters-patent  of  October  26,  1360.  The  ap- 
pointment above  mentioned  of  Edward's  commissioners  on 
November  15,  1361,  seems  to  throw  upon  the  French  the 
burden  of  proving  that  John  sent  his  envoys  with  equally 
full  powers  to  the  place  of  meeting,  and  that  the  non-inter- 
change of  renunciations  was  owing  to  the  English  govern- 
ment. But  though  an  historian,  sixty  years  later  (Juvenal  des 
Ursins),  asserts  that  the  French  commissioners  attended  at 
Bruges,  and  that  those  of  Edward  made  default,  this  is 
certainly  rendered  improbable  by  the  actual  appointment  of 
commissioners  made  by  the  king  of  England  on  the  loth  of 
November,  by  the  silence  of  Charles  V.  after  the  recom- 
mencement of  hostilities,  who  would  have  rejoiced  in  so  good 
a  ground  of  excuse,  and  by  the  language  of  some  English 
instruments,  complaining  that  the  French  renunciations  were 
withheld.1  It  is  suggested  by  the  French  authors  that  Ed- 
ward was  unwilling  to  execute  a  formal  renunciation  of  his 
claim  to  the  crown.  But  we  can  hardly  suppose  that,  in 
order  to  evade  this  condition,  which  he  had  voluntarily  im- 


1  It  appears  that,  among  other  alleged 
infractions  of  the  treaty,  the  king  of 
France  had  received  appeals  from  Ar- 
niagnac,  Albret  and  other  nobles  of 
Aquitaine,  not  long  after  the  peace.  For, 
in  February,  1362,  a  French  envoy,  the 
count  de  Tancarville,  being  in  England, 
the  privy  council  presented  to  Edward 
their  bill  of  remonstrances  against  this 
conduct  of  France  ;  et  semble  au  conseil 
le  roy  d'Angleterre  que  considere  la 
fourme  de  la  ditte  paix,  que  tant  estoit 
honourable  et  profitable  au  royaume  de 
France  et  a  toute  chretiente,  que  la  re- 
ception desdittes  appellacions  n'a  niie 
este  bien  faite,  ne  passee  si  ordenement, 
ne  a  si  bon  affection  et  amour,  conime  il 
droit  avoir  este  fait  de  raison  parmi  I'ef- 
fet  et  l'intention  de  la  paix  et  ailliances 
affermees  et  entr'eux  semble  estre  moult 
prejudiciables  et  contraires  a  l'onneur  et 
a  l'estat  du  roy  et  de  son  fils  le  prince  et 
de  toute  la  maison  d'Angleterre,  et  pour- 
ra  estre  evidente  matiere  de  rebellion  des 
subgiez,  et  aussi  donner  tres-grant  oc- 
casion d'enfraindre  la  paix,  si  bon  re- 
mede  sur  ce  n'y  soit  mis  plus  hastive- 
ment.  Upon  the  whole  they  conclude 
that  if  the  king  of  France  would  repair 
this  trespass,  and  send  his  renunciation 


of  sovereignty,  the  king  should  send  his 
of  the  title  of  France.  Martenne,  Thes. 
Anec.  t.  i.  p.  1487. 

Four  princes  of  the  blood,  or,  as  they 
are  termed,  Seigneurs  des  Fleurdelys, 
were  detained  as  hostages  for  the  due  ex- 
ecution of  the  treaty  of  Bretigni,  which, 
from  whatever  pretence,  was  delayed  for 
a  considerable  time.  Anxious  to  obtain 
their  liberty,  they  signed  a  treaty  a; 
London  in  November,  1362,  by  which, 
among  other  provisions,  it  was  stipulated 
that  the  king  of  France  should  send 
fresh  letters,  under  his  seal,  conveying 
and  releasing  the  territories  ceded  by  the 
peace,  without  the  clause  contained  in 
the  former  letters,  retaining  the  ressort: 
et  que  en  ycelles  lettres  soit  expresse- 
ment  compris  transport  de  la  souver- 
ainete  et  du  ressort,  &c.  Et  le  roi 
d'Angleterre  et  ses  enfans  ferront  sem- 
blablement  autiels  renonciations,  sur  ce 
q'il  doit  faire  de  sa  partie.  Rymer,  t.  vi. 
p.  396.  This  treaty  of  London  was  never 
ratified  by  the  French  government ;  but 
I  use  it  as  a  proof  that  Edward  imputed 
the  want  of  mutual  renunciations  to 
France,  and  was  himself  ready  to  per- 
form his  part  of  the  treaty. 


France.  PEACE  OF  BRETIGtfl.  71 

posed  upon  himself  by  the  treaties  of  Bretigni  and  Calais,  he 
would  have  left  his  title  to  the  provinces  ceded  by  those  con- 
ventions imperfect.  He  certainly  deemed  it  indefeasible,  and 
acted,  without  any  complaint  from  the  French  court,  as  the 
perfect  master  of  those  countries.  He  created  his  son  prince 
of  Aquitaine,  with  the  fullest  powers  over  that  new  principal- 
ity, holding  it  in  fief  of  the  crown  of  England  by  the  yearly 
rent  of  an  ounce  of  gold.1  And  the  court  of  that  great 
prince  was  kept  for  several  years  at  Bordeaux. 

I  have  gone  something  more  than  usual  into  detail  as  to 
these  circumstances,  because  a  very  specious  account  is  given 
by  some  French  historians  and  antiquaries  which  tends  to 
throw  the  blame  of  the  rupture  in  1368  upon  Edward  in.2 
Unfounded  as  was  his  pretension  to  the  crown  of  France,  and 
actuated  as  we  must  consider  him  by  the  most  ruinous  am- 
bition, his  character  was  unblemished  by  ill  faith.  There  is 
no  apparent  cau>e  to  impute  the  ravages  made  in  France  by 
soldiers  formerly  in  the  English  service  to  his  instigation,  nor 
any  proof  of  a  connection  with  the  king  of  Navarre  subse- 
quently to  the  peace  of  Bretigni.  But  a  good  lesson  may  be 
drawn  by  conquerors  from  the  change  of  fortune  that  befell 
Edward  III.  A  long  warfare,  and  unexampled  success,  had 
procured  for  him  some  of  the  richest  provinces  of  France. 
Within  a  short  time  he  was  entirely  stripped  of  them,  less 
through  any  particular  misconduct  than  in  consequence  of  the 
intrinsic  difficulty  of  preserving  such  acquisitions.  The  French 
were  already  knit  together  as  one  people;  and  even  those 

i  Rym.  t.  vi.  p.  385-389.  One  clause  serve,  I  hope,  to  repel  their  arguments, 
is  remarkable ;  Edward  reserves  to  him-  which,  I  may  be  permitted  to  observe, 
self  the  right  of  creating  the  province  of  no  English  writer  has  hitherto  under- 
Aquitaine  into  a  kingdom.  So  high  were  taken  to  answer.  This  is  not  said  in 
the  notions  of  this  great  monarch  in  an  order  to  assume  any  praise  to  myself;  in 
age  when  the  privilege  of  creating  new  fact,  I  have  been  guided,  in  a  great  de- 
kingdoms  was  deemed  to  belong  only  to  gree,  by  one  of  the  adverse  counsel,  M. 
the  pope  and  the  emperor.  Etiam  si  per  Bonamy,  whose  statement  of  facts  is  very 
nos  hujusmodi  provincife  ad  regalis  bono-  fair,  and  makes  me  suspect  a  little  that 
ris  titulum  et  fastigium  imposterum  sub-  he  saw  the  weakness  of  his  own  cause, 
limentur;  quam  erectionem  faciendam  The  authority  of  Christine  de  Pis;m, 
per  nos  ex  tunc  specialiter  reservamus.  a  contemporary  panegyrist  of  the  French 

2  Besides  Villaret  and  other  historians,  king,  is  not,  perhaps,  very  material  in 

fcre  reader  who  feels  any  curiosity  on  this  such  a  question  ;  but  she  seems  wholly 

subject  may  censult  three   memoirs  in  ignorant   of  this  supposed  omission  on 

the'  15th  volume  of  the  Academy  of  In-  Edward's  side,  and  puts  the  justice  of 

scrjptions  by  MM.  Secousse,  Salier,  and  Charles   V.'s   war    on    a    very   different 

Bonamy. — These  distinguished  antiqua-  basis;  namely,  that  treaties  not  condU' 

ries  unite,  but  the  third  with  much  less  cive  to  the  public  interest  ought  not  tc 

conl  ience  and  passion  than   the  other  be  kept.  —  Collection  des  Memoires,  t.  v. 

two,  \a  charging  the  omission  upon  Ed-  p.   137.    A  principle  more  often  aru-ri 

wartf     The  observations  in  the  text  will  upon  than  avowed ! 


72  RUPTURE  OF    III  J :    PEACE.     Chap   [.  Pari  II 

whose  feudal  duties  sometimes  lead  them  into  the  field  against 
their  sovereign  could  nol  endure  the  feeling  of  dismember* 
men!  from  the  monarchy.  When  the  peace  of  Bretigni  was 
to  be  carried  into  effect,  the  nobility  of  the  South  remon- 
strated againsi  the  loss  of  the  king'-  sovereignty, and  -honed, 
it  is  said,  in  their  charters  granted  by  Charlemagne,  a  promise 
never  to  transfer  the  right  of  protecting  them  to  another 
The  citizens  of  Rochelle  implored  the  king  not  to  desert 
l hem,  and  protested  their  readiness  to  pay  half  their  estates 
in  taxes,  rather  than  fall  under  the  power  of  England.  John 
with  heaviness  of  heart  persuaded  these  faithful  people  to 
comply  with  that  destiny  which  he  had  not  been  able  to  sur- 
mount. At  length  they  sullenly  submitted  :  we  will  obey,  they 
said,  the  English  with  our  lips,  but  our  hearts  shall  never 
forget  their  allegiance.1  Such  unwilling  subjects  might  per- 
haps have  been  won  by  a  prudent  government ;  but  the  tem- 
per of  the  prince  of  Wales,  which  was  rather  stern  and 
arbitrary,  did  not  conciliate  their  hearts  to  his  cause.2  After 
the  expedition  into  Castile,  a  most  injudicious  and  fatal  enter- 
prise, he  attempted  to  impose  a  heavy  tax  upon  Guienne. 
This  was  extended  to  the  lands  of  the  nobility,  who  claimed 
an  immunity  from  all  impositions.  Many  of  the  chief  lords 
in  Guienne  and  Gascony  carried  their  complaints 
Rupfur/of  t0  tue  throne  of  Charles  V.,  who  had  succeeded  his 
the  peace  of  father  in  1364,  appealing  to  him  as  the  prince's 
sovereign  and  judge.  After  a  year's  delay  the 
king  ventured  to  summon  the  Black  Prince  to 
answer  these  charges  before  the  peers  of  France,  and  the  war 
immediately  recommenced  between  the  two  countries.3 

Though  it  is  impossible  to  reconcile  the  conduct  of  Charles 
upon  this  occasion  to  the  stern  principles  of  rectitude  which 
ought  always  to  be  obeyed,  yet  the  exceeding  injustice  of  Ed- 
ward in  the  former  war,  and  the  miseries  which  he  inflicted 
upon  an  unoffending  people  in  the  prosecution  of  his  claim, 
will  go  far  towards  extenuating  this  breach  of  the  treaty  of 

i  Froissart,  part  i.  chap.  214.  3  On  November  20, 1368,  some  time  be- 

2  See  an  anecdote  of  his  differenCeVith  fore  the  summons  of  the  prince  of  Wales, 

the  seigneur  d'Albret,  one  of  the  princi-  a  treat;  was  concluded  between  Charles 

pal   barons  in  Gascony,  to  which  Frois-  and  Henry  kins;  of  Castile,   wherein  the 

\  who  was  then  at  Bordeaux,  ascribes  latter  expressly  stipulates  that  whatever 

the  alienation  of  the  southern  nobility,  parts  of  Guienne  or  England  he  might 

chap.  24-1.  —  Edward  III.,  soon  after  the  conquer  he  would  give  up  to  the  king  of 

fieace  of  Bretigni,  revoked  all  his  grants  France.  —  Rynier,  t  vi.  p.  598. 
n  Guienne.  —  Rymer,  t.  vi.  p.  391 


France.  LOSS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  CONQUESTS.  73 

Bretigni.  It  is  observed,  indeed,  with  some  truth  by  Rapin. 
that  we  judge  of  Charles's  prudence  by  the  event  ;  and  that, 
if  he  had  been  unfortunate  in  the  war,  he  would  have  brought 
on  himself  the  reproaches  of  all  mankind,  and  even  of  those 
writers  who  are  now  most  ready  to  extol  him.  But  his 
measures  had  been  so  sagaciously  taken,  that,  except  through 
that  perverseness  of  fortune,  against  which,  especially  in  war 
there  is  no  security,  he  could  hardly  fail  of  success.  The 
elder  Edward  was  declining  through  age,  and  the  younger 
through  disease ;  the  ceded  provinces  were  eager  to  return 
to  their  native  king,  and  their  garrisons,  as  we  may  infer  by 
their  easy  reduction,  feeble  and  ill-supplied.  France,  on  the 
other  hand,  had  recovered  breath  after  her  losses  ;  the  sons  of 
those  who  had  fallen  or  fled  at  Poitiers  were  in  the  field ;  a 
king,  not  personally  warlike,  but  eminently  wise  and  popular, 
occupied  the  throne  of  the  rash  and  intemperate  John.  She 
was  restored  by  the  policy  of  Charles  V.  and  the  valor  of  Du 
Gktesclin.  This  hero,  a  Breton  gentleman  without  fortune  or 
exterior  graces,  was  the  greatest  ornament  of  France  during 
that  age.  Though  inferior,  as  it  seems,  to  Lord  Chandos  in 
military  skill,  as  well  as  in  the  polished  virtues  of  chivalry, 
his  unwearied  activity,  his  talent  of  inspiring  confidence,  his 
good  fortune,  the  generosity  and  frankness  of  his  character, 
have  preserved  a  fresh  recollection  of  his  name,  which  has 
hardly  been  the  case  with  our  countryman. 

In  a  few  campaigns  the  English  were  deprived  of  almost 
all  their  conquests,  and  even,  in  a  great  degree,  of 

. ,     .  •    •      i  •  •      r*    '  rn  °        '  The  English 

their  original  possessions  in  (jruienne.      lney  were   lose  ail 
still  formidable   enemies,  not  only  from  their  cour-   tlc^^0X1' 
age  and  alacrity  in  the  war,  but  on  account  of  the 
keys  of  France  which  they  held  in  their  hands  ;  Bordeaux, 
Bayonne,   and   Calais,    by   inheritance    or    conquest ;    Brest 
and  Cherbourg,  in  mortgage  from  their  allies,  the  duke  of 
Britany  and  king  of  Navarre.     But  the  successor  of  Edware1 
III.  was  Richard  II. ;  a  reign  of  feebleness  and  sedition  gave 
no   opportunity  for  prosecuting    schemes    of  ambition.     The 
war,-  protracted    with    few  distinguished   events    for    several 
years,  was  at   length  suspended  by  repeated  armistices,  not, 
indeed,  very  strictly  observed,  and  which  the  animosity  of  the 
English  would   not  permit    to   settle   in  any   regular  treaty. 
Nothing  less  than   the  terms  obtained  at  Bretigni,  emphati- 
cally called  the  Great  Peace,  would  satisfy  a  frank  and  cour- 


74  CHARLES  V.  AND  VI.        Chat.  1    Part.  II. 

ageous  people,  who  deemed  themselves  cheated  by  the  mari- 
ner of  its  infraction.  The  war  was  therefore  always  popular 
in  England,  and  the  credit  which  an  ambitious  prince,  Thomas 
duke  of  Gloucester,  obtained  in  that  country,  was  chiefly 
owing  lo  the  determined  opposition  which  he  showed  to  all 
French  connections.  But  the  politics  of  Richard  II.  were  of 
a  different  cast ;  and  Henry  IV.  was  equally  anxious  to  avoid 
hostilities  with  France  ;  so  that,  before  the  unhappy  condition 
of  that  kingdom  tempted  his  son  to  revive  the  claims  of  Ed- 
ward in  still  more  favorable  circumstances,  there  had  been 
thirty  years  of  respite,  and  even  some  intervals  of  friendly 
intercourse  between  the  two  nations.  Both,  indeed,  were 
weakened  by  internal  discord  ;  but  France  more  fatally  than 
England.  But  for  the  calamities  of  Charles  VI.'s  reign,  she 
would  probably  have  expelled  her  enemies  from  the  kingdom. 
The  strength  of  that  fertile  and  populous  country  was  re- 
cruited with  surprising  rapidity.  Sir  Hugh  Calverley,  a 
famous  captain  in  the  wars  of  Edward  III.,  while  serving  in 
Flanders,  laughed  at  the  herald,  who  assured  him  that  the 
king  of  Frauce's  army,  then  entering  the  country,  amounted 
to  26,000  lances;  asserting  that  he  had  often  seen  their  larg- 
est musters,  but  never  so  much  as  a  fourth  part  of  the  num- 
ber.1 The  relapse  of  this  great  kingdom  under  Charles  VI. 
was  more  painful  and  perilous  than  her  first  crisis ;  but  she 
recovered  from  each  through  her  intrinsic  and  inextinguish- 
able resources. 

Charles  V.,  surnamed  the  Wise,  after  a  reign,  which,  if  we 
Accession  of  ovei'l°0k  a  little  obliquity  in  the  rupture  of  the 
chart  s  vi.,  peace  of  Bretigni,  may  be  deemed  one  of  the  most 
honorable  in  French  history,  dying  prematurely, 
left  the  crown  to  his  son,  a  boy  of  thirteen,  under  the  care  of 
three  ambitious  uncles,  the  dukes  of  Anjou,  Berry,  and  Bur- 
gundy. Charles  had  retrieved  the  glory,  restored  the  tran- 
quillity, revived  the  spirit  of  his  country  ;  the  severe  trials 
which  exercised  his  regency  after  the  battle  of  Poitiers  had 
disciplined  his  mind;  he  became  a  sagacious  statesman,  an 
encourager  of  literature,  a  beneficent  lawgiver.  lie  erred, 
doubtless,  though  upon  plausible  grounds,  in  accumulating  a 
vast  treasure,  which  the  duke  of  Anjou  seized  before  he  was 
eold  in  the  grave.  But  all  the  fruits  of  his  wisdom  were  lost 
in  the  succeeding  reign.     In  a  government  essentially  popu 

iFrofssart,  p.  ii.  c.  142. 


tf'RAKCE. 


SEDITIONS  AT  PARIS.  <3 


Lar  the  youth  or  imbecility  of  the  sovereign  creates  no  mate- 
rial derangement.  In  a  monarchy,  where  all  the  springs  of 
the  system  depend  upon  one  central  force,  these  accident.-, 
which  are  sure  in  the  course  of  a  few  generations  to  recur, 
can  scarcely  fail  to  dislocate  the  whole  machine.  During 
the  forty  years  that  Charles  VI.  bore  the  name  of  king, 
rather  than  reigned  in  France,  that  country  was  reduced 
to  a  state  far  more  deplorable  than  during  the  captivity  of 

John. 

A  great  change  had  occurred  in  the  political  condition  of 
France  during  the  fourteenth  century.     As  the  feudal  militia 
became  unserviceable,  the  expenses  of  war  were  increased 
through  the  necessity  of  taking  troops  into  constant  pay  ;  and 
while°  more  luxurious  refinements  of  living  heightened  the 
temptations  to  profuseness,  the  means  of  enjoying  them  were 
lessened  by  improvident  alienations  of  the  domain.     Hence, 
taxes,  hitherto  almost  unknown,  were  levied  incessantly,  and 
with  all  those  circumstances  of  oppression  which  are  natural 
to  the  fiscal  proceedings  of  an  arbitrary  government.     These, 
as  has  been  said  before,  gave  rise  to  the  unpopularity  of  the 
two  first  Valois,  and  were  nearly  leading  to  a  complete  revo- 
lution in  the  convulsions  that  succeeded  the  battle  of  Poitiers. 
The  confidence  reposed  in  Charles  V.'s  wisdom  and  economy 
kept  everything  at  rest  during  his   reign,  though  the  taxes 
were  still  very  heavy.     But  the  seizure  of  his  vast  accumula- 
tions by  the  duke  of  Anjou,  and  the  ill  faith  with  which  the 
new  government  imposed  subsidies,  after  promising  their  abo- 
lition, provoked  the  people  of  Paris,  and  some-   seditions 
times  of  other  places,  to  repeated  seditions.     The  at  Pans- 
States-General  not  only  compelled  the  government  to  revoke 
these  impositions  and  restore  the  nation,  at  least  according  to 
the  language  of  edicts,  to  all  their  liberties,  but,  with  less  wis- 
dom, refused  to  make  any  grant  of  money.     Indeed  a   re- 
markable spirit  of  democratical  freedom  was  then  rising  in 
those  classes  on  whom  the  crown  and  nobility  had  so  long 
trampled.     An  example  was  held  out  by  the  Flemings,  who, 
always  tenacious  of  their  privileges,  because  conscious  of  their 
ability  to  maintain  them,  were  engaged  in  a  furious  conflict  with 
Louis  count  of  Flanders.1     The  court  of   France  took  part 

i  The  Flemish  rebellion,  which  origi-  upon  the  people  of  Ghent  without  their 
Dated  in  an  attempt,  suggested  by  bad  consent,  is  related  in  a  veryjnteresting 
»dvisers  to   the  count,  to  impose  a  tax    manner  by  Froissart,  p.  ii.  c.  37,  &c,  wh.' 


76  SEDITIONS  AT   PARIS.         Chap.  I.  Part  11 

in  this  war;  and  after  obtaining  a  decisive  victory  over  the 
citizens  of  Ghent,  Charles  VI.  returned  to  chastise  those  of 
Paris.1  Unable  to  resist  the  royal  army,  the  city  was  treated 
as  the  spoil  of  conquest;  its  immunities  abridged;  its  most 
active  leaders  put  to  death;  a  tine  of  uncommon  severity  im- 
posed;  and  the  taxes  renewed  by  arbitrary  prerogative.  But 
the  people  preserved  their  indignation  for  a  favorable  mo- 
ment ;  and  were  unfortunately  led  by  it,  when  rendered  sub- 
servient to  the  ambition  of  others,  into  a  series  of  crimes,  and 
a  long  alienation  from  the  interests  of  their  country. 

It  is  difficult  to  name  a  limit  beyond  which  taxes  will  not 
be  borne  without  impatience,  when  they  appear  to  be  called 
for  by  necessity,  and  faithfully  applied ;  nor  is  it  impracticable 
for  a  skilful  minister  to  deceive  the  people  in  both  these 
respects.  But  the  sting  of  taxation  is  wastefulness.  What 
hio-h-spirited  man  could  see  without  indignation  the  earnings 
of  his  labor,  yielded  ungrudgingly  to  the  public  defence, 
become  the  spoil  of  parasites  and  speculators?  It  is  this 
that  mortifies  the  liberal  hand  of  public  spirit ;  and  those 
statesmen  who  deem  the  security  of  government  to  depend 
not  on  laws  and  armies,  but  on  the  moral  sympathies  and 
prejudices  of  the  people,  will  vigilantly  guard  against  even 
the  suspicion  of  prodigality.  In  the  present  stage  of  society 
it  is  impossible  to  conceive  that  degree  of  misapplication 
which  existed  in  the  French  treasury  under  Charles  VI., 
because  the  real  exigencies  of  the  state  could  never  again  be 
so  inconsiderable.     Scarcely  any  military  force  was  kept  up ; 

equals  Herodotus  in  simplicity,  liveliness,  Parisians,   Froissart    says,    would    have 

and  power  over  the  heart.     I  would  ad-  spread  over  France  ;  toute  gentillesse  et 

vise   the   historical  student  to  acquaint  noblesse    efit   ete    morte    et    perdue  en 

himself  with  these  transactions  and  with  France;  nor   would  the  Jacquerie  have 

the  corresponding  tumults  at  Paris.  ever  been  si  grande  et  si  horrible,    c.  120. 

They  are  among  the  eternal  lessons  of  To   the  e  ample  <>f  the  Oantois  he   as- 

history  ;  for  the   unjust  encroachments  cribes  the  tumults  which  broke  out  about 

of  courts,  the   intemperate   passions  of  the  same  time  in  England  as  well  as  in 

tin-   multitude,  the  ambition  of   dema-  France,  c.  84.     The  Flemish  insurrection 

gogues,  the  cruelty  of  victorious  factions,  would  probably  have  had  more  important 

will  never  cease  to  have  their  parallels  consequences  if  it  had  been  cordially  sup- 

aml  their  analogies ;  whi'.e  the  military  ported  by  the  English  government.     But 

achievements  of   distant  times  afford  in  the   danger  of  encouraging   that    demo- 

general  no  instruction,  and  can  hardly  cratical  spirit  which  so  strongly  leavened 

occupy  too  little  of  our  time  in  historical  the  commons  of  England  might  justly 

Btndies.     The  prefaces   to  the  fifth  and  be  deemed  by  Richard  II. 's  council  much 

sixth  volumes  of  the   Ordonnances   des  more  than  a   counterbalance  to  the  ad- 

Rois    de    France   contain  more   accurate  vantage    of    distressing    Prance.       When 

in  brmation   as  to  the  Parisian  disturb-  too  late,  some  attempts  were  made,  and 

than  can  he  found  in  Froissart.  the   Flemish   towns  acknowledged  Rich- 

l  If  Charles  VI.  had   been  defeated  by  ard  as  king  of  France  in  1384.     Rymer 

the   Flemings,    the   insurrection    of    the  t.  vii.  p.  448 


France.  SEDITIONS  AT  FARIS.  77 

and  the  produce  of  the  grievous  impositions  then  levied  was 
chiefly  lavished  upon  the  royal  household,1  or  plundered  by 
the  officers  of  government.  This  naturally  resulted  from  the 
peculiar  and  afflicting  circumstances  of  this  reign.  The 
duke  of  Anjou  pretended  to  be  entitled  by  the  late  king's 
appointment,  if  not  by  the  constitution  of  France,  to  exercise 
the  government  as  regent  during  the  minority ;  '2  but  this 
period,  which  would  naturally  be  very  short,  a  law  of  Charles 
V.  having  fixed  the  age  of  majority  at  thirteen,  was  still  more 
abridged  by  consent ;  and  after  the  young  monarch's  corona- 
tion, he  was  considered  as  reigning  with  full  personal  au- 
thority. Anjou,  Berry,  and  Burgundy,  together  with  the 
king's  maternal  uncle,  the  duke  of  Bourbon,  divided  the 
actual  exercise  of  government. 

The  first  of  these  soon  undertook  an  expedition  into  Italy, 
£o  possess  himself  of  the  crown  of  Naples,  in  which  he  per- 
ished. Berry  was  a  profuse  and  voluptuous  man,  of  no  great 
talents  ;  though  his  rank,  and  the  middle  position  which  he 
held  between  struggling  parties,  made  him  rather  conspicuous 
throughout  the  revolutions  of  that  age.  The  most  respecta- 
ble of  the  king's  uncles,  the  duke  of  Bourbon,  being  further 
removed  from  the  royal  stem,  and  of  an  unassuming  charac- 

1  The  expenses  of  the  royal  household,  patent;  and  supposes  that  the  king  had 
which  under  Charles  V.  were  94,000  suppressed  both,  as  neither  party  seems 
livres,  amounted  in  1412  to  450,000.  to  have  availed  itself  of  their  authority 
Villaret,  t.  iii.  p.  243.  N  et  the  kiug  was  in  the  discussions  that  took  place  aftei 
so  ill  supplied  that  his  plate  had  been  the  king's  death.  (Hist,  de  France,  t.iii. 
pawned.  When  Montagu,  minister  of  p.  662,  edit.  1720).  Villaret.  as  is  too 
the  finances,  was  arrested,  in  1409,  all  much  his  custom,  slkies  over  the  dim- 
this  plate  was  found  concealed  in  his  culty  without  notice.  Hut  M.  de  Bre- 
house.  quigni  (Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscript.  1. 1. 

2  It  has  always  been  an  unsettled  p.  533)  observes  that  the  second  of  these 
point  whether  the  presumptive  heir  is  instruments,  as  published  by  M.  Se- 
entitled  to  the  regency  of  France;  and,  cousse,  in  the  Ordonnauces  des  ltois,  t. 
if  he  be  so  to  the  regency,  whether  this  vi.  p.  406,  differs  most  essentially  from 
includes  the  custody  of  the  minor's  per-  that  in  Dupuy,  and  contaius  no  mention 
son.  The  particular  case  of  the  duke  of  whatever  of  the  government.  It  is, 
Anjou  is  subject  to  a  considerable  appar-  therefore,  easily  reconcilable  with  the 
ent ■difficulty.  Two  instruments  of  Charles  first,  that  confers  the  regency  on  tL% 
V.,  bearing  the  same  date  of  October,  1374,  duke  of  Anjou.  As  Dupuy  took  it  from 
as  published  by  Dupuy  (Traite  de  Ma-  the  same  source  as  Secousse,  namely, 
jorite  de3  ltois,  p.  161),  are  plainly  irrec-  the  Tresor  des  Char  tea,  a  strong  sus- 
oncilable  with  each  other;  the  former  picion  of  wilful  interpolation  falls  upoc 
giving  the  exclusive  regency  to  the  duke  him,  or  upon  the  editor  of  his  posthu 
of  Anjou,  reserving  the  custody  of  the  mous  work,  printed  in  1655-  This  date 
minor's  person  to  other  guardians;  the  will  readily  suggests  motive  for  such  an 
latter  conferring  not  only  this  custody,  interpolation  to  those  who  recollect  the 
but  the  government  of  the  kingdom,  on  circumstances  of  France  at  that  time  and 
the  queen,  and  on  the  dukes  of.  Bur-  for  some  years  before;  Anne  of  Austria 
gundy  and  Bourbon,  without  mention-  having  maintained  herself  in  possession 
ing  the  duke  of  Anjou's  name.  Daniel  of  a  testamentary  regency  against  the 
calls    these   testaments   of    Charles   V.,  presumptive  heir 

whereas  they  are  in  the  form  of  letters- 


78  DERANGEMENT  OF  CHARLES  VI.  Chap.  I.  Part  n 

ter,  took  a  less  active  part  than  his  three  coadjutors.  Bur- 
gundy, nn  ambitious  and  able  prince,  maintained  the  ascen- 
dency, until  Chillies,  weary  of  a  restraint  which  had  been 
_.  protracted  by  his  uncle  till  he  was  in  his  twenty- 
first  year,  took  the  reins  into  his  own  hands.  The 
dukes  of  Burgundy  and  Berry  retired  from  court,  and  the 
administration  was  committed  to  a  different  set  of  men,  at 
the  head  of  whom  appeared  the  constable  de  Ctisson,  a  sol- 
dier of  great  fame  in  the  English  wars.  The  people  rejoiced 
in  the  fall  of  the  princes  by  whose  exactions  they  had  been 
plundered;  but  the  new  ministers  soon  rendered  themselves 
odious  by  similar  conduct.  The  fortune  of  Clisson,  after  a 
few  years'  favor,  amounted  to  1,700,000  livres,  equal  in 
weight  of  silver,  to  say  nothing  of  the  depreciation  of  money, 
to  ten  times  that  sum  at  present.1 

Charles  VI.  had  reigned  five  years  from  his  assumption 
of  power,  when  he  was  seized  with  a  derangement 
mentof  of  intellect,  which  continued,  through  a  series  of 
P^jmJ1-  recoveries  and  relapses,  to  his  death.  He  passed 
thirty  years  in  a  pitiable  state  of  suffering,  neglected 
by  his  family,  particularly  by  the  most  infamous  of  women. 
Isabel  of  Bavaria,  his  queen,  to  a  degree  which  is  hardly 
credible.2  The  ministers  were  immediately  disgraced;  the 
princes  reassumed  their  stations.  For  several  years  the 
duke  of  Burgundy  conducted  the  government.  But  this  was 
Parties  of  m  opposition  to  a  formidable  rival,  Louis,  Duke 
Burgundy  of  Orleans,  the  king's  brother.  It  was  impossible 
that  a  prince  so  near  to  the  throne,  favored  by  t\e 
queen,  perhaps  with  criminal  fondness,  and  by  the  people  on 
account  of  his  external  graces,  should  not  acquire  a  share  of 
power.  He  succeeded  at  length  in  obtaining  the  whole  ma?i- 
agement  of  affairs  ;  wherein  the  outrageous  dissoluteness  of 
his  conduct,  and  still  more  the  excessive  taxes  imposed,  ren- 
dered him  altogether  odious.  The  Parisians  compared  his 
administration  with  that  of  the  duke  of  Burgundy ;  and  from 
that  time  ranged  themselves  on  the  side  of  the  latter  and  his 

1  Froissart,  p.  iv.  c.  46.  of  Orleans,  and  represents  her  as  merely 

-  Bismondj  inclines  to  speak  more  fa-  an  indolent  woman  fond  of  good  cheer 

rorabl;  of  this  queen  than   most  have  Yet  he  owns  that  the  king  was  so  neg 

done:   "  Dana  lee  t«'inps  posterieurs  on  lected  as  to  suffer  from  an  excessive  want 

s'est  plu  A  (aire  an  monstre  de  [sabean  of  cleanliness,  sometimes  eyes  fromhun- 

de  Baviere."'    Be  discredits  the  suspicion  ger  (xu.  218,  225).     Was  this  no  hnputa- 

of  a  criniiiM    intercourse  with  the  duke  tion  on  his  wife  ?    Sec  too  Michelet,  vi.42 


France.  MURDER  OF  THE  DUKE  OF  ORLEANS.  79 

family,  throughout  the  long  distractions  to  which  the  ambition 
of  these  princes  gave  birth. 

The  death  of  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  in  1404,  after  sev- 
eral fluctuations  of  success  between  him  and  the  duke  of 
Orleans,  by  no  means  left  his  party  without  a  head.  Equally 
brave  and  ambitious,  but  far  more  audacious  and  unprinci- 
pled, his  son  John,  surnamed  Sanspeur,  sustained  the  same 
contest.  A  reconciliation  had  been,  however,  brought  about 
with  the  duke  of  Orleans ;  they  had  sworn  reciprocal  friend- 
ship, and  participated,  as  was  the  custom,  in  order  to  render 
these  obligations  more  solemn,  in  the  same  communion.  In 
the  midst  of  this  outward  harmony,  the  duke  of 
Orleans  was  assassinated  in  the  streets  of  Paris.  thSukeof 
After  a  slight  attempt  at  concealment,  Burgundy  Orleans, 
avowed  and  boasted  of  the  crime,  to  which  he  had  AD" 
been  instigated,  it  is  said,  by  somewhat  more  than  political 
jealousy.1  From  this  fatal  moment  the  dissensions  of  the 
royal  family  began  to  assume  the  complexion  of  civil  war. 
The  queen,  the  sons  of  the  duke  of  Orleans,  with  the  dukes 
of  Berry  and  Bourbon,  united  against  the  assassin.  But  he 
possessed,  in  addition  to  his  own  appanage  of  Burgundy,  the 
county  of  Flanders  as  his  maternal  inheritance;  and  the 
people  of  Paris,  who  hated  the  duke  of  Orleans,  readily  for- 
gave, or  rather  exulted  in  his  murder.2 

i  Orleans  is  said  to  have  boasted  of  of  Orleans,  when  they  were  openly  and 

the  duchess  of  Burgundy's  favors.     Vill.  vehemently  the    partisans    of  his   mur- 

t.   xii.   p.   474.      Ainelgard,  who    wrote  derer?     On  the  first  return  of  the  duke 

about  eighty  years  after  the  time,  says,  of  Burgundy  to  Paris  after  the  assassi 

vim  etiam  inferre  attentare  praesumpsit.  nation,   the  citizens   shouted   Noel,  tin. 

Notices  desManuscritsduRoi,  t.  i.  p.  411.  usual  cry  on  the  entrance  of  the  king 

2  Michelet  represents  this  young  prince  to  the  great  displeasure  of  the  queen  ami 

as  regretted  and  beloved;  but  his  Ian-  other   princes.     "  Et  pour  vrai,  commt 

guage  is  full  of  those  strange  contrasts  dit  est  dessus,  il  estoit  tres  fort  ayme  du 

and  inconsistencies  which,  for  the  sake  commun    peuple    de    Paris,   et  avoient 

of  effect,  this  most  brilliant  writer  some-  grand  esperance  qu'iceluy  due  eust  tre? 

times  employs.     "  II  avait,  dans  ses  em-  grand  affection  au  royaume,  et  a  la  chost 

portemens  de  jeunesse,  terriblement  vexe  publicque,   et    avoient    souvenauce    de# 

le  peuple;  il  futmauditdn  peuple,  pleure  grans  tailles  qui  avoient  este  mises  sue 

du    peuple.     Vivant,   il    couta    bien   de  depuis  la  mort  du  due  Philippe  de  Bour- 

larmes;  mais   combien   plus,    mort!     Si  gogne   pere  d'iceluy,  jusques  a  l'heure 

▼ous  eussiez  demande  a  la  France  si  ce  presente,  lesquelles  ils  entendoient  que 

jeune   homme  etait  bien  digne  de  taute  feust  par  le  moyen  dudit  due  d'Orleaus. 

d'amour,  elle  eat  repondu,  Je   l'ahnais.  Et  pource  estoit  grandement  encouru  en 

Ce  n'est  pas  seulement  pour  le  bien  qu'on  l'indignation    d'iceluy    peuple,    et    leur 

aime ;  qui  aime,  aime   tout,  les  defauts  sembloit  que  Dieu  de  sa  grace  les  avcit 

aussi.    Celui-ci  plut  comme  il  etait,  mele  tres-grandement      pour      recommandez, 

de  bien  et  de  mal.     (Hist,  de  France,  vi.  quand   il   avoit  souffert    qu'ils    fussent 

6.)     What  is  the  meaning  of  this  love  for  hors  de  sa  subjection  et  governement,  et 

one  who,  he  has  just  told  us,  was  cursed  qu'ils  en  estoient  delivrez."     Monstrelet, 

by   the  people  ?     And  if  Paris  was  the  34.    Compare  this  with  what  M.  Michelet 

representative  of  France,    how   did   the  has  written. 
p*cple  show  their  affection  for  the  duke 


80  CIVIL  WAR.  Chap.  I.  Part  11 

It  is  easy  to  estimate  the  weakness  of  the  government,  from 
the  terms  upon  which  the  duke  of  Burgundy  was  permitted 
to  obtain  pardon  at  Chartres,  a  year  after  the  perpetration  of 
the  crime.  As  soon  as  he  entered  the  royal  presence,  every 
one  rose,  except  the  king,  queen,  and  dauphin.  The  duke, 
approaching  the  throne,  fell  on  his  knees  ;  when  a  lord,  who 
acted  as  a  sort  of  counsel  for  him,  addressed  the  king :  "  Sire, 
the  duke  of  Burgundy,  your  cousin  and  servant,  is  come 
before  you,  being  informed  that  he  has  incurred  your  dis- 
pleasure, on  account  of  what  he  caused  to  be  done  to  the  duke 
of  Orleans  your  brother,  for  your  good  and  that  of  your  king- 
dom, as  he  is  ready  to  prove  when  it  shall  please  you  to  hear 
it,  and  therefore  requests  you,  with  all  humility,  to  dismiss 
your  resentment  towards  him,  and  to  receive  him  into  your 
favor."  1 

This  insolent  apology  was  all  the  atonement  that  could  be 
extorted  for  the  assassination  of  the  first  prince  of 
*.D'  '  the  blood.  It  is  not  wonderful  that  the  duke  of 
between  Burgundy  soon  obtained  the  management  of  affairs, 
the  parties.  an(j  c|rove  hjg  adversaries  from  the  capital.  The 
princes,  headed  by  the  father-in-law  of  the  young  duke  of 
Orleans,  the  count  of  Armagnac,  from  whom  their  party  was 
now  denominated,  raised  their  standard  against  him  ;  and  the 
north  of  France  was  rent  to  pieces  by  a  protracted  civil  war, 
in  which  neither  party  scrupled  any  extremity  of  pillage  or 
massacre.  Several  times  peace  was  made  ;  but  each  faction, 
conscious  of  their  own  insincerity,  suspected  that  of  their 
adversaries.  The  king,  of  whose  name  both  availed  them- 
selves, was  only  in  some  doubtful  intervals  of  reason  capable 
of  rendering  legitimate  the  acts  of  either.  The  dauphin, 
aware  of  the  tyranny  which  the  two  parties  alternately  exer- 
cised, was  forced,  even  at  the  expense  of  perpetuating  a  civil 
war,  to  balance  one  against  the  other,  and  permit  neither  to 
be  wholly  subdued.     He  gave  peace  to  the  Armagnacs  at 

1412        Auxerre,  in  despite  of  the  duke  of  Burgundy  ;  and, 

having  afterwards   united   with   them  against  this 

prince,  and  carried  a  successful  war  into  Flanders,  he  disap- 

-,.-.,,        pointed  their  revenge  by  concluding  with  him  a 

A.D.  1414.  l  .  °         J  & 

treaty  at  Arras. 
This   dauphin   and   his   next  brother  died  within   sixteen 
months   of  each   other,   by  which   the   rank  devolved    upon 

i  Monstrelet,  part  i.  f.  112. 


Chance.  MURDER  OF  DUKE  OF  BURGUNDY.  81 

Charles,  youngest  son  of  the  king.     The  count  of  Armagnac 
now  constable  of  France,  retained  possession  of  the  govern- 
ment.    But  his  severity,  and  the  weight  of  taxes, 
revived  the  Burgundian  party  in  Paris,  which  a 
rigid  proscription  had  endeavored  to  destroy.     He  brought  on 
his  head  the  implacable  hatred  of  the  queen,  whom  he  had 
not  only  shut  out  from  public  affairs,  but  disgraced  by  the 
detection  of  her  gallantries.     Notwithstanding  her 
ancient  enmity  to  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  she  made 
overtures  to  him,  and,  being  delivered  by  his  troops  from  con- 
finement, declared  herself  openly  on  his  side.     A  few  obscure 
persons  stole  the  city  keys,  and   admitted  the  Burgundians 
into  Paris.     The  tumult  which  arose  showed  in  a  moment 
the  disposition  of  the  inhabitants  ;  but  this  was  more  horribly 
displayed  a  few  days  afterwards,  when  the  populace,  rushing 
to  the  prisons,  massacred  the  constable  d' Armagnac 
and  his  partisans.     Between  three  and  four  thou- 
sand persons  were  murdered  on  this  day,  which  has  no  paral- 
lel but  what  our  own   age   has  witnessed,  in   the   massacre 
perpetrated  by  the  same  ferocious  populace  of  Paris,  under 
circumstances  nearly  similar.     Not  long  afterwards  an  agree- 
ment took  place  between  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  who  had  now 
the   king's   person   as   well    as   the   capital   in   his 

•  AD    1419 

hands,  and  the  dauphin,  whose  party  was  enfeebled 
by  the  loss  of  almost   all   its  leaders.     This   reconciliation, 
which  mutual  interest  should  have  rendered  per- 
manent, had  lasted  a  very  short  tirne,.  when  the  Assassination 

t    1  n  -r>  t  .  j  ...  of  the  duke  Oi 

duke  oi  Burgundy  was  assassinated  at  an  interview  Burgundy. 

with  Charles,  in  his  presence,  and  by  the  hands  of 

his  friends,  though  not,  perhaps,  with  his  previous  knowledge.1 


i  There  are  three  suppositions  conceiv-  could  not  accept  without  offending  God  , 
able  to  explain  this  important  passage  in  and  conjecture  that  this  might  mean  the 
history,  the  assassination  of  John  Sans-  assassination  of  the  dauphin.  But  the 
peur.  1.  It  was  pretended  by  the  dau-  expressions  of  Henry  do  not  relate  to  any 
phin's  friends  at  the  time,  and  has  been  private  proposals  of  the  duke,  but  to  de- 
maintained  more  lately  (St.  Foix,  Essais  mands  made  by  him  and  the  queen,  as 
eur  Paris,  t.  iii.  p.  209,  edit.  1767),  that  he  proxies  for  Charles  VI.  in  conference  for 
had  premeditated  the  murder  of  Charles,  peace,  which  he  says  he  could  not  accept 
and  that  his  own  was  an  act  of  self-de-  without  offending  God  and  contravening 
fence.  This  is,  I  think,  quite  improbable  :  his  own  letters-patent.  (Kymer,  t.  ix.  p 
the  dauphin  had  a  great  army  near  the  790.)  It  is  not,  however,  very  clear  what 
spot,  while  the  duke  was  only  attended  this  means.  2.  The  next  hypothesis  is, 
by  five  hundred  men.  Villaret,  indeed,  that  it  was  the  deliberate  act  of  Charles. 
and  St.  Foix,  in  order  to  throw  suspicion  But  his  youth,  his  feebleness  of  spirit. 
upon  the  duke  of  Burgundy's  motives,  and  especially  the  consternation  into 
assert  that  Henry  V.  accused  him  of  which,  by  all  testimonies  he  was  thrown 
having  made  proposals  to  him  which  he  by  the  event,  are  rather  adverse  to  this 

VoU  1.  — M.  6 


82  INTMGUES   WITH  ENGLAND.    Chap.  I.  Paw  Ii 

From  whomsoever  the  crime  proceeded,  it  was  a  deed  of  in- 
fatuation, and  plunged  France  afresh  into  a  sea  of  perils,  from 
which  the  union  of  these  factions  had  just  afforded  a  hope  of 
extricating  her. 

It  has  been  mentioned  already  that  the  English  war  had 

almost  ceased  during  the  reigns  of  Richard  II.  and 
French.168  Henry  IV.  The  former  of  these  was  attached  by 
pri!,!Iv%witl1    inclination,  and   latterly  by  marriage,  to  the  court 

of  France  ;  and,  though  the  French  government 
showed  at  first  some  disposition  to  revenge  his  dethronement, 
yet  the  new  king's  success,  as  well  as  domestic  quarrels, 
deterred  it  from  any  serious  renewal  of  the  war.  A  long 
commercial  connection  had  subsisted  between  England  and 
Flanders,  which  the  dukes  of  Burgundy,  when  they  became 
sovereigns  of  the  latter  country  upon  the  death  of  count 
Louis  in  1384,  were  studious  to  preserve  by  separate  truces.1 
They  acted  upon  the  same  pacific  policy  when  their  interest 
predominated  in  the  councils  of  France.  Henry  had  even 
a  negotiation  pending  for  the  marriage  of  his  eldest  son  with 
a  princess  of  Burgundy,'2  when  an  unexpected  proposal  from 
the  opposite  side  set  more  tempting  views  before  his  eyes. 
The  Armagnacs,  pressed  hard  by  the  duke  of  Burgundy, 
offered,  in  consideration  of  only  4000  troops,  the  pay  of  which 
they  would  themselves  defray,  to  assist   him    in   the  recov- 

ery  of  Guienne  and  Poitou.     Four  princes  of  the 

blood  —  Berry,  Bourbon,  Orleans,  and  Alencon  — 
disgraced  their  names  by  signing  this  treaty.3  Henry  broke 
off  his  alliance  with  Burgundy,  and  sent  a  force  into  France, 
which  found  on  its  arrival  that  the  princes  had  made  a  sep- 
arate treaty,  without  the  least  concern  for  their  English  allies. 
After  his  death,  Henry  V.  engaged  for  some  time  in  a  serie- 
of  negotiations  with  the  French  court,  where  the  Orleans 
party  now  prevailed,  and  with  the  duke  of  Burgundy.  He 
even  secretly  treated  at  the  same  time  for  a  marriage  with 
Catherine  of  France  (which  seems  to  have  been  his  favorite, 

explanation.     3.  It  remains  only  to  con-  quenees,  than  that  which  had  provoke! 

elude  that  Tanegui  de  Chastel,  and  other  it.     Charles,  however,  by  his  subsequent 

favorites  of  the  dauphin,  long  attached  conduct,  recognized  their  deed,  and  nat 

to  the   Orleans   faction,  who  justly  re-  urally  exposed  himself  tp  the  resentment 

garded  the  duke  as  an  infamous  assassin,  of  the  young  duke  of  Burgundy. 

and  might  question  his  sincerity  or  their  '  Rymer,   t.    viii.  p.  511;  Villaret.  * 

own  safety  if  he  should  regain  the  ascen-  xii.  p.  174. 

dant,  took  advantage  of  this  opportunity  -  idem,  r.  viii.  p    721. 

to  commit  an  act  of  retaliation,  less  eriin-  8  Idem,  t.  viii    p.  726,  787   73S 

iuai,  )  it  not  less  ruinous  in  its  conse- 


France.  INVASION  BY  HENKY  V.  83 

as   it    was   ultimately   his    successful   project),  aud    with    a 

daughter  of  the   duke  —  a    duplicity   not    creditable    to   his 

memory.1     But  Henry's  ambition,  which  aimed  at  the  highest 

quarry,  was  not  long  fettered  by  negotiation  ;  and,  indeed,  his 

proposals   of  marrying   Catherine  were    coupled   with    such 

exorbitant  demands,  as  France,  notwithstanding  all 

her  weakness,  could  not  admit,  though  she  would   FrIS by°f 

have  ceded  Guienne,  and  given  a  vast  dowry  with   Henry  v. 

the  princess.2     He  invaded  Normandy,  took  Har- 

fieur,  and  won  the  great  battle  of  Azincourt  on  his  march  to 

Calais.3 

The  flower  of  French  chivalry  was  mowed  down  in  this 
fatal  day,  but  especially  the  chiefs  of  the  Orleans  party,  and 
the  princes  of  the  royal  blood,  met  with  death  or  captivity. 
Burgundy  had  still  suffered  nothing ;  but  a  clandestine  nego- 
tiation had  secured  the  duke's  neutrality,  though  he  seems 
not  to  have  entered  into  a  regular  alliance   till  a  year  after 
the  battle  of  Azincourt,  when,  by  a  secret  treaty  at  Calais,  he 
acknowledged  the  right  of   Henry  to  the  crown  of  France, 
and  his  own  obligation  to  do  him  homage,  though  its  per- 
formance  was   to   be   suspended  till    Henry  should    become 
master  of  a  considerable  part  of  the  kingdom.4     In  a  second 
Invasion  the  English  achieved  the  conquest  of  Normandy  ; 
and  this,  in  all  subsequent  negotiations  for  peace  during  the 
life  of  Henry,  he  would  never  consent  to  relinquish.     After 
several  conferences,  which  his  demands  rendered  abortive,  the 
French  court  at  length  consented  to  add   Normandy  to  the 
essions  made   in   the   peace  at  Bretigni;5   and   the   treaty, 
hough  laboring  under  some  difficulties,  seems  to  have  been 
early  completed,  when  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  for   July  n 
easons  unexplained,  suddenly  came  to  a  reconcil-   141^- 

1  Rymer,  t.  ix.  p.  136.  9000  were  knights  or  gentlemen.    Almost 

2  The  terms  required  by  Henry's  am-  as  many  were  made  prisoners.  The  Eng- 
bassadors  in  1415  were  the  crown  of  lish,  according  to  Monstrelet,  lost  1600 
France ;  or,  at  least,  reserving  Henry's  men  ;  but  their  own  historians  reduce 
rights  to  that,  Normandy,  Touraine,  this  to  a  very  small  number.  It  is  curious 
Maine,  Guienne,  with  the  'homage  of  that  the  duke  of  Berry,  who  advised  the 
Britany  and  Flanders.  The  French  of-  French  to  avoid  an  action,  had  been  in 
fered  Ouienne  and  Saintonge,  and  a  the  battle  of  Poitiers  fifty-nine  years 
dowry  of  800,000  gold  crowns  for  Oath-  before.    Vill.  t.  xiii.  p.  355. 

erine.    The  English  demanded  2,000,000.        4  Compare  Rym.  t.  ix.  p.  34,  138,  304, 
Rym.  t.  ix.  p.  218.  394.     The  last  reference  is  to  the  treaty 

3  The  English  army  at  Azincourt  was    of  Calais. 

probably  of  not  more"  than  15,000  men  ;        5  Rym.  t.  ix.  p.  628,  763.    Nothing  can 

the  French  were  at  the  least  50,000,  and,  be  more  insolent  than  the  tone  of  Hen 

by  some  computations,  much  more  nu-  ry's  instructi  ms  to  his  commissioners 

cierous.    They  lost  10,00Ck''  led,  of  whom  p.  628. 


84  TREAT!   OF  TROYES.  Chap.  I.  Pakt  H 

iation  with  the  dauphin.  This  event,  which  musl  have  been 
intended  adversely  to  Henry,  would  probably  have  broken  off* 
pept.  10  :1^  parley  on  the  subject  of*  peace,  if  it  had  not 
1419.  been  speedily  followed  by  one  still  more  surprising, 

the  assassination  of  the  duke  of  Burgundy  at  Montereau. 

An  act  of  treachery  so  apparently  unprovoked  inflamed 
the  minds  ot  that  powerful  party  which  had  looked  up  to  the 
duke  as  their  leader  and  patron.  The  city  of  Paris,  especially, 
abjured  at  once  its  respect  for  the  supposed  author  of  the 
murder,  though  the  legitimate  heir  of  the  crown.  A  solemn 
oath  was  taken  by  all  ranks  to  revenge  the  crime  ;  the  nobility, 
the  clergy,  the  parliament,  vying  with  the  populace  in  their 
invectives  against  Charles,  whom  they  now  styled  only  pre- 
tended (soi-disant)  dauphin.  Philip,  son  of  the  assassinated 
duke,  who,  with  all  the  popularity  and  much  of  the  ability  of 
his  father,  did  not  inherit  all  his  depravity,  was  instigated  by 
a  pardonable  excess  of  filial  resentment  to  ally  himself  with 
the  king  of  England.  These  passions  of  the  people  and  the 
duke  of  Burgundy,  concurring  with  the  imbecility  of  Charles 
Treaty  of  VI.  and  the  rancor  of  Isabel  towards  her  son,  led 
Troyes,  to  the  treaty  of  Troves.     This  compact,  signed  by 

May,  1420.         .,  j    j    l  •  c  *i       1  ■  u 

the  queen  and  duke,  as  proxies  ot  the  king,  who 
had  fallen  into  a  state  of  unconscious  idiocy,  stipulated  that 
Henry  V.,  upon  his  marriage  with  Catherine,  should  become 
immediately  regent  of  France,  and,  after  the  death  of  Charles, 
succeed  to  the  kingdom,  in  exclusion  not  only  of  the  dauphin, 
but  of  all  the  royal  family.1  It  is  unnecessary  to  remark  thai 
these  flagitious  provisions  were  absolutely  invalid.  But  the} 
had  at  the  time  the  strong  sanction  of  force;  and  Henry  might 
plausibly  flatter  himself  with  a  hope  of  establishing  his  own 
usurpation  as  firmly  in  France  as  his  father's  had  been  in 
England.  What  not  even  the  comprehensive  policy  of  Ed- 
ward in.,  the  energy  of  the  Black  Prince,  the  valor  of  their 
Knollyses  and  Chandoses,  nor  his  own  victories  could  attain, 
now  seemed,  by  a  strange  vicissitude  of  fortune,  to  court  his 

1  As  if  through  shame  on   account  of  treaty,  which  he  was  too  proud  to  n  Unit, 

what  was  to  follow,  the  first  articles  con-  The  treaty  of  Troyes   was  confirmed  by 

tain  petty  stipulations  about  the  dower  the  States-General,  or  rather  by  a  partial 

of  Catherine.     The  sixth  gives  the  king-  convention  which  assumed  the  name,  in 

dom  of  France  after  Charles'  to  December  1420.     Rym.  t.  x.  p.  30.    Th« 

Henry  and  bis  heirs.     The  seventh  con-  parliament  of   England    did' the   Bame 

e  lea   the  immediate     regency.     Henry  Id   p.  110.     It  is  printed  at  full  length 

kepi    Normandy   by    right  of  conquest,  by  Villaret,  t.  xv.  p   84. 
not   in  virtue  of  an j  stipulation   in  the 


France.     CAUSES  OF  THE  SUCCESS   OF  THE  ENGLISH.       85 

ambition.  During  two  years  that  Henry  lived  after  the  treat; 
of  Troyes,  he  governed  the  north  of  France  with  unlimited 
authority  in  the  name  of  Charles  VI.  The  latter  survived 
his  son-in-law  but  a  few  weeks  ;  and  the  infant  Henry  VI. 
was  immediately  proclaimed  king  of  France  and  England, 
under  the  regency  of  his  uncle  the  duke  of  Bedford. 

Notwithstanding  the  disadvantage  of  a  minority,  the  Eng- 
lish cause  was  less  weakened  by  the  death  of  Henry  than 
might  have  been  expected.     The  duke  of  Bedford  partook  of 
the  same  character,  and  resembled  his  brother  in  state  of 
faults  as  well  as  virtues ;  in  his  haughtiness  and  France  at  the 
arbitrary  temper  as  in  his  energy  and  address.    At  Charles  vn. 
the  accession  of  Charles  VII.  the  usurper  was  ac-  AD- 1422- 
knowledged  by  all  the  northern  provinces  of  France,  except 
a  few  fortresses,   by   most  of   Guienne,  and    the 
dominions  of  Burgundy.     The   duke  of  Britany 
soon  afterwards  acceded  to  the  treaty  of  Troyes,  but  changed 
his   party  again    several    times   within    a    few    years.     The 
central   provinces,  with   Languedoc,  Poitou,  and   Dauphine, 
were  faithful  to  the  king.     For  some  years  the  war  continued 
without  any  decisive  result ;  but  the  balance  was  clearly  swayed 
in  favor  of  England.     For  this  it  is  not  difficult  to  assign  sev- 
eral  causes.     The  animosity  of  the  Parisians  and  Causeaofthe 
the  duke  of  Burgundy  against  the  Armagnac  party  success  of  the 
still  continued,  mingled  in  the  former  with  dread  Eagllsh- 
of  the  king's  return,  whom  they  judged  themselves  to  have 
inexpiably  offended.     The   war   had  brought   forward   some 
accomplished  commanders  in  the  English  army  ;  surpassing, 
not  indeed  in  valor  and  enterprise,  but  in  military  skill,  any 
whom  France  could  oppose  to  them.     Of  these  the  most  dis- 
tinguished, besides  the  duke  of  Bedford  himself,  were  War- 
wick,  Salisbury,  and   Talbot.     Their  troops,  too,  were   still 
very  superior  to  the   French.     But  this,  we  must  in  candor 
allow,  proceeded  in  a  great  degree  from  the  mode  in  which 
they  were  raised.     The  war  was  so  popular  in  England  that 
it  was  easy  to  pick  the  best  and  stoutest  recruits,1  and  their 
high  pay  allured  men  of  respectable  condition  to  the  service. 
We  find   in   Rymer  a  contract  of  the  earl  of  Salisbury  to 
supply  a  body  of  troops,  receiving  a  shilling  a  day  for  every 
man-at-arms,  and  sixpence  for  each  archer.2     This  is,  per- 

i  Monstielet,  part  i.  f.  303.  for  600  men-at-arms,  including  six  ban 

a  Rym.  t.  x.  p.  392      This  contract  was    ueretsand  thirty-four  bachelors;  and  roi 


86    CAUSES  OF  SUCCESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH.    Chap.  I.  Part  II 

haps,  equal  to  fifteen  times  the  sum  at  our  present  value  of 
money.  They  were  bound,  indeed,  to  furnish  their  own 
equipments  and  horses.  But  France  was  totally  exhausted 
by  her  civil  and  foreign  war,  and  incompetent  to  defray  the 
expenses  even  of  the  small  force  which  defended  the  wreck 
of  the  monarchy.  Charles  VII.  lived  in  the  utmost  poverty 
at  Bourges.1  The  nobility  had  scarcely  recovered  from  the 
fatal  slaughter  of  Azincourt  ;  and  the  infantry,  composed  of 
peasants  or  burgesses,  which  had  made  their  army  so  numer- 
ous upon  that  day,  whether  from  inability  to  compel  their 
services,  or  experience  of  their  inefficacy,  were  never  called 
into  the  field.  It  became  almost  entirely  a  war  of  partisans. 
Every  town  in  Picardy,  Champagne,  Maine,  or  wherever  the 
contest  might  be  carried  on,  was  a  fortress  ;  and  in  the  attack 
or  defence  of  these  garrisons  the  valor  of  both  nations  was 
called  into  constant  exercise.  This  mode  of  warfare  was 
undoubtedly  the  best  in  the  actual  state  of  France,  as  it 
gradually  improved  her  troops,  and  flushed  them  with  petty 
successes.  But  what  principally  led  to  its  adoption,  was  the 
license  and  insubordination  of  the  royalists,  who,  receiving  no 
pay,  owned  no  control,  and  thought  that,  provided  they  acted 
against  the  English  and  Burgundians,  they  were  free  to  choose 
i  heir  own  points  of  attack.  Nothing  can  more  evidently  show 
the  weakness  of  France  than  the  high  terms  by  which  Charles 
VII.  was  content  to  purchase  the  assistance  of  some  Scottish 
auxiliaries.  The  earl  of  Buchan  was  made  constable ;  the 
earl  of  Douglas  had  the  duchy  of  Touraine,  with  a  new  title, 
lieutenant-general  of  the  kingdom.  At  a  subsequent  time 
Charles  offered  the  province  of  Saintonge  to  James  I.  for  an 
aid  of  6000  men.  These  Scots  fought  bravely  for  France, 
though  unsuccessfully,  at  Crevant  and  Verneuil ;  but  it  must 
be  owned  they  set  a  sufficient  value  upon  their  service.  Un- 
der all  these  disadvantages  it  would  be  unjust  to  charge  the 
French  nation  with  any  inferiority  of  courage,  even  in  the 
most  unfortunate  periods  of  this  war.  Though  frequently 
panic-struck  in  the  field  of  battle,  they  stood  sieges  of  their 
walled  towns  with  matchless  spirit  and  endurance.  Perhaps 
some  analogy  may  be  found  between  the  character  of  the 

1700  archers  ;  bien  et  suffisamment  mon-  at-arms,  Is. ;  and  for  each  archer,   Qd. 

tez,  armez,  et  arraiez  comme    a    leurs  Artillery -men   were    paid    higher    thin 

estats  appartient.     The  pay  was,  for  the  men-at-arms. 

earl,  65.  %<l.  a  day;  for  a  banneret,  4s.;  J  Villaret,  t.  xiv.  p.  802 

for  a  bachelor,  2>  ;  for  erery  other  man- 


Frasce.  SIEGE  OF   ORLEANS.  87 

French  commonalty  during  the  English  invasion  and  the 
Spaniards  of  the  late  peninsular  war.  But  to  the  exertions 
of  those  brave  nobles  who  restored  the  monarchy  of  Charles 
VII.  Spain  has  afforded  no  adequate  parallel. 

It  was,  however,  in  the  temper  of  Charles  VII.  that  his  ene- 
mies found  their  chief  advantage.  This  prince  is  character  of 
one  of  the  few  whose  character  has  been  improved  Charles  vn. 
by  prosperity.  During  the  calamitous  morning  of  his  reign 
he  shrunk  from  fronting  the  storm,  and  strove  to  forget  him- 
self in  pleasure.  Though  brave,  he  was  never  seen  in  war ; 
though  intelligent,  he  was  governed  by  flatterers.  Those  who 
had  committed  the  assassination  at  Montereau  under  his  eyes 
were  his  first  favorites ;  as  if  he  had  determined  to  avoid  the 
only  measure  through  which  he  could  hope  for  better  success, 
a  reconciliation  with  the  duke  of  Burgundy.  '  The  count  de 
Richemont,  brother  of  the  duke  of  Britany,  who  became  af- 
terwards one  of  the  chief  pillars  of  his  throne,  consented  to 
renounce  the  English  alliance,  and  accept  the  rank  of  consta- 
ble, on  condition  that  these  favorites  should  quit 
the  court.  Two  others,  who  successively  gained 
a  similar  influence  over  Charles,  Richemont  publicly  caused 
to  be  assassinated,  assuring  the  king  that  it  was  for  his  own 
and  the  public  good.  Such  was  the  debasement  of  morals  and 
government  which  twenty  years  of  civil  war  had  produced ! 
Another  favorite,  La  Tremouille,  took  the  dangerous  office, 
and,  as  might  be  expected,  employed  his  influence  against 
Richemont,  who  for  some  years  lived  on  his  own  domains, 
rather  as  an  armed  neutral  than  a  friend,  though  he  never 
lost  his  attachment  to  the  royal  cause. 

It  cannot  therefore  surprise  us  that  with  all  these  advan- 
tages the  regent  duke  of  Bedford  had  almost  completed  the 
capture  of  the  fortresses  north  of  the  Loire  when  siege  of 
he  invested  Orleans   in    1428.     If  this    city  had  Orleans, 
fallen,  the  central  provinces,  which  were  less  furnished  with 
defensible  places,  would  have  lain  open  to  the  enemy  >  and  it 
is  said  that  Charles  VII.  in  despair  was  about  to  retire  into 
Dauphine.     At  this  time    his  affairs    were   restored    by  one 
of  the  most  marvellous  revolutions  in  history.     A  Joan  of 
country  girl  overthrew  the  power  of  England.    We  Arc' 
cannot  pretend  to  explain  the  surprising  story  of  the  Maid  of 
Orleans  ;  for,  however  easy  it  may  be  to  suppose  that  a  heated 
and  enthusiastic  imagination  produced  her  own  visions,  it  is  a 


88  JOXN    OF    A.RC.  CHAP.  I.  Pari  li 

much  greater  problem  to  account  for  the  credit  they  obtained, 
and  for  the  success  that  attended  her.  Nor  will  this  be  solved 
by  the  hypothesis  of  :i  concerted  stratagem;  which,  if  we  do 
not  judge  altogether  from  events,  must  appear  liable  to  so 
many  chances  of  failure,  that  it  could  not  have  suggested  it- 
self to  any  rational  person.  However,  it  is  certain  that  the 
appearance  of  Joan  of  Arc  turned  the  tide  of  war,  which 
from  that  momenl  flowed  without  interruption  in  Charles's 
favor.  A  superstitious  awe  enfeebled  the  sinews  of  the  Eng- 
lish. They  hung  back  in  their  own  country,  or  deserted  from 
the  army,  through  fear  of  the  incantation-  by  which  alone 
they  conceived  >o  extraordinary  a  person  to  suceeed.1  As 
men  always  make  sure  of  Providence  for  an  ally,  whatever 
untoward  fortune  appeared  to  result  from  preternatural  causes 
was  at  once  ascribed  to  infernal  enemies  ;  and  such  bigotry 
may  be  pleaded  as  an  excuse,  though  a  very  miserable  one, 
for  the  detestable  murder  of  this  heroine.2 

The  spirit  which  Joan  of  Arc  had  roused  did  not  subside. 
The  kin*  France  recovered  confidence  in  her  own  strength, 
retrieves5        which  had  been  chilled  by  a  long  course  of  adv 

a  air  '     fortune.     The  king,  too,  shook  off  his   indolence,8 

i  Rym.  t.  x.  p.  458-472.  This,  how-  giving  up  the  kingdom  as  lost  at  the 
ever,  is  conjecture;  for  the  cause  of  their  time  when  Orleans  was  besieged  in  1428. 
desertion  is  not  mentioned  in  these  proc-  Mezeray,  Daniel,  \  illaret,  and,  T  believe, 
lamations,  though  Itymer  has  printed  every  other  modern  historian,  have  men- 
it  in  their  title.  But  the  duke  of  Bed-  tioned  this  circumstance; -and  so 
ford  speaks  of  the  turn  of  success  as  them,  among  whom  is  Hume,  with  the 
astonishing,  and  due  only  to  thesupersti-  addition  that  Agnes  threatened  to  ieuve 
tious  fear  which  the  English  had  con-  the  court  of  Charles  for  that  of 
ceived  of  a  female  magician.  Rymer,  t.  affirming  that  she  was  born  to  be  the 
x.  p.  408.  mistress    of    a    great    king.       The    - 

2  M.   de   l'Averdy,   to  whom   we    owe  part  of  this  tale  is  evidently  a  fabrication, 

the  copious  account  of  the  proceedings  Henry  VI.  being  at  the   time  a   child  of 

against  Joan   of   Arc,  as   well   as  those  seven  years  old.     But  I  have,  to  say  the 

which  Charles  V!  I.  instituted  in  order  to  least,   great   doubts   of    the  main  story, 

rescind  the  former,  contained  in  the  third  It   is   not   mentioned   by   contemporary 

volume  of   Notices   des    Manuscrits   du  writers.     On  the  contrary,  what  they  say 

Roi,  lias  justly  made  this  remark   which  of  Agnes  Leads  me  to  think  the  dates  in- 

is  founded  on  the  eagerness  shown  by  the  compatible.     Agnes  died  (in  childbed,  as 

University  of  Paris  in  the  prosecution,  some  say)  in  1450;  twenty-two  years aftei 

and  on   its   being  conducted   before   an  the   siege  of  Orleans.      Monstrelet   says 

Inquisitor;  a  circumstance  exceedingly  that  she  had  been  about  five  years  in  the 

remarkable  in    the  ecclesiastical    history  Service  of  the  queen  :    and  the  king  tak 

of    France.      But  another    material    ob-  ir.g  pleasure  in    her    liveliness    and    wit, 

servation  arises  out   of  this.     The  Maid  common  fame    had  spread    abroad    that 

was  pursued  witli  peculiar   bitterness  by  she  lived  in  concubinage  with  him.     She 

her  countrymen  of  the  English,  or  rather  certainly  had   a   child,  and  was  willing 

Burgundian,   faction;  a  proof  that    in  that  it  should  be  thought  the  king's ;  but 

1480  their  animosity  against  Charles  VII.  he  alwa  >ouvoit  bien 

rill  ardent.     [Notk  XVI.]  avoir  emprunt£  ailleurs.     1't.  hi.    f 

*  It  is  a  current  piece  of  history  that  Olivier  de  la  Marc  he  :;  i  tempo- 

Agnes  Sorel.  mistress  of   Charles   VII.,  rary,  who  lived  in  the  court  of  Burj 

had  the   merit  of  rJisguading   him   from  says,  about  tiie  year  1111.    le  >■■ 


FhJLXCE. 


AGNES  SOREL. 


89 


and  permitted  Richemont  to  exclude,  his  unworthy  favor- 
ites from  the  court.  This  led  to  a  very  important  conse- 
quence. The  duke  of  Burgundy,  whose  alliance  with  Eng- 
land had  been  only  the  fruit  of  indignation  at  his  father's 
murder,  felt  naturally,  as  that  passion  wore  out,  into  senti- 
ments more  congenial  to  his  birth  and  interests.  A  prince  of 
the  house  of  Capet  could  not  willingly  see  the  inheritance  of 
his  ancestors  transferred  to  a  stranger.  And  he  had  met 
with  provocation  both  from  the  regent  and  the  duke  of  Glou- 
cester, who,  in  contempt  of  all  policy  and  justice,  had  endeav- 
ored, b}r  an  invalid  marriage  with  Jacqueline,  countess  of 
Hainault  and  Holland,  to  obtain  provinces  which  Burgundy 
designed  for  himself.     Yet  the  union  of  his  sister  with  Bed- 


nouvelleiuent  esleve  une  pauvre  demoi- 
selle, gentifemme,  nominee  Agnes  Sorel, 
et  mis  en  tel  triumphe  et  tel  pouvoir, 
que  son  estat  estoit  a  comparer  au\ 
grandes  princesses  de  royaume,  et  cerfcea 
j'estoit  uue  des  plus  belles  femmes  que 
je  vey  oucques,  et  fit  en  sa  qualite  beau- 
coup  au  royaume  de  France.  Elle  avan- 
<;oit  devers  le  roy  jeuues  gens  d'armes  et 
gentils  compaignons,  et  dont  le  roy  de- 
puis  fut  bieu  servy.  La  Marche;  Mem. 
Hist.  t.  viii.  p.  145.  Du  Olercq,  whose 
memoirs  were  first  published  in  the  same 
collection,  says  that  Agnes  mourut  par 
poison  moult  jeusie.  lb.  t.  viii.  p.  410. 
And  the  con  tin  ua tor  of  Monstrelet,  prob- 
ably John  Chartier,  speaks  of  the  youth 
and  beauty  of  Agnes,  which  exceeded 
that  of  any  other  woman  in  France,  and 
of  the  favor  shown  her  by  the  king, 
which  so  much  excited  the  displeasure  of 
the  dauphin,  on  his  mother's  account, 
and  he  was  suspected  of  having  caused 
her  to  be  poisoned,  fol.  68.  The  same 
writer  affirms  of  Charles  VII.  that  he 
was,  before  the  peace  of  Arras,  de  moult 
belle  vie  et  devote;  but  afterwards  en- 
laidit  sa  vie  de  tenir  malies  femmes  en 
son  hostel,  &c.  fol.  86. 

It  is  for  the  reader  to  judge  how  far 
these  passages  render  it  improbable  that 
Agues  Sorel  was  the  mistress  of  Charles 
VII.  at  the  siege  of  Orleans  in  142^.  and, 
consequently,  whether  she  is  entitled  to 
the  praise  which  she  has  received,  of  be- 
ing instrumental  in  the  deliverance  of 
France  The  tradition,  however,  is  as  an- 
cient as  Francis  I.,  who  made  in  her  honor 
i  quatrain  which  is  well  known.  This 
probably  may  have  brought  the  story 
more  into  vogue,  and  led  Mezeray,  who 
was  not  very  critical,  to  insert  it  in  his 
history,  from  which  it  has  passed  to  his 
followers.  Its  origin  was  apparently  the 
popular    character  of   Agues.     She   was 


the  Nell  Gwyn  of  France;  and  justly  be 
loved,  not  only  for  her  charity  and  cour- 
tesy, but  for  bringing  forward  men  of 
merit,  and  turning  her  influence,  a  vir- 
tue very  rare  in  her  class,  towards  tho 
public  interest.  From  thence  it  w.y 
natural  to  bestow  upon  her,  in  after- 
times,  a  merit  not  ill  suited  to  her  char 
acter,  but  which  an  accurate  observation 
of  dates  seems  to  render  impossible.  But 
whatever  honor  I  am  compelled  to  de- 
tract from  Agnes  Sorel,  I  am  willing  to 
transfer  undiminished  to  a  more  unblem- 
ished female,  the  injured  queen  of  Charles 

II.,  Mary  of  Anjou,  who  has  hitherto 
only  shared  with  the  usurper  of  her 
rights  the  credit  of  awakening  Charles 
from  his  lethargy.  Though  I  do  uot 
know  on  what  foundation  even  this  rests, 
it  is  uot  unlikely  to  be  true,  and,  in  def- 
erence to  the  sex,  let  it  pass  undisputed. 

Sismondi  (vol.  \iii.  p.  204),  where  ho 
first  mentions  Agnes  Sorel,  says  that 
many  of  the  circumstances  told  of  her 
influence  over  Charles  VII.  are  fabulous. 
"  Cependant  il  faut  bieu  qu' Agues  ait 
merite,  en  quelque  maniere,  la  reconnois- 
sance  qui  s:est  attachee  a  son  nom." 
This  is  a  loose  and  inconclusive  way  of 
reasoning  in  history  ;  many  popular  tra- 
ditions have  no  basis  at  all.  And  in 
p.  345  he  slights  the  story  told  in  Bran- 
tome  to  the  honor  of  Agnes,  as  well  he 
might,  since  it  is  ridiculously  untrue  tha  t 
she  threatened  Charles  to  go  to  the  court 
of  Henry  VI.,  knowing  herself  to  be 
born  to  be  the  mistress  of  a  great  kin<r. 
Sismondi  afterwards  (p.  497  and  604) 
quotes,  as  I  have  done,  Chartier  and 
Jacques  du  Clercq;  but  without  adverting 
to  the  incongruity  of  their  dates  with 
the  current  story.  M.  Michelet  does  not 
seem  to  attach  much  credit  to  it,  thougll 
he  adopts  the  earlier  date  for  the  king 
attachment  to  Agnes. 


90  IMPOLICY  OF  THE  ENGLISH.    Chap    I.  Taut  II. 

ford,  the  obligations  by  which  he  was  bound,  and,  most  of  all, 
the  favor  shown  by  Charles  VII.  to  the  assassins  of  his  father, 
andisrec-  kept  him  for  many  years  on  the  English  side,  al- 
onciied  to       though  rendering  it  less  and  less  assistance.     But 

the  duke  of 

Burgundy,  at  length  he  concluded  a  treaty  at  Arras,  the  terms 
a.d.  1435.  0f  whicn  he  dictated  rather  as  a  conqueror  than  a 
subject  negotiating  with  his  sovereign.  Charles,  however,  re- 
fused nothing  for  such  an  end  ;  and,  in  a  very  short  time,  the 
Burgundians  were  ranged  with  the  French  against  their  old 
allies  of  England. 

It  was  now  lime  for  the  latter  to  abandon  those  magnificent 
impolicy  of  projects  of  conquering  France  which  temporary 
the  English.  circumstance  ■  alone  had  seemed  to  render  feasible. 
But  as  it  is  a  natural  effect  of  good  fortune  in  the  game  of 
war  to  render  a  people  insensible  to  its  gradual  change,  the 
English  could  not  persuade  themselves  that  their  affairs  were 
irretrievably  declining.  Hence  they  rejected  the  offer  of 
Normandy  and  Guienne,  subject  to  the  feudal  superiority  of 
France,  which  was  made  to  them  at  the  congress  of  Arras ; ] 
and  some  years  afterwards  when  Paris,  with  the  adjacent 
provinces,  had  been  lost,  the  English  ambassadors,  though 
empowered  by  their  private  instructions  to  relax,  stood  upon 
demands  quite  disproportionate  to  the  actual  position  of  af- 
fairs.2 As  foreign  enemies,  they  were  odious  even  in  that 
part  of  France  which  had  acknowledged  Henry ; 3  and 
when  the  duke  of  Burgundy  deserted  their  side,  Paris  and 
The  lose  every  other  city  were  impatient  to  throw  off  the 
ail  their  yoke.     A  feeble  monarchy,  and   a  selfish  council, 

A°D.qiM9S'  completed  their  ruin:  the  necessary  subsidies  were 
raised  with  difficulty,  and,  when  raised,  misapplied. 
It  is  a  proof  of  the  exhaustion  of  France,  that  Charles  was 
unable,  for  several  years,  to  reduce  Normandy  or  Guienne, 
which   were  so   ill-provided   for   defence.4     At   last    he  came 


iVillaret  says,  Les  plenipotentiaires  de  Charles  V.,  preserving   only    a  homage 

Charles  offrirent  la  cession   de   la   Nor-  per  paragiuw.  as   it  was   called,  which 

man  die  et  de  la  Guienne   en  toute  pro-  implied  no  actual  supremacy.    Monatrelet 

pricti  sous   la  clause  de   I'/iommage  d  la  says   only,  que  per  certaines  conditions 

covronne,  t.  xv.  p.  174.     But  he  does  not  luy  seroient  accordees  les  seign  curies  de 

quote  his  authority,  and  I  do  not  like  to  Guienne  et  Normandie. 

rely  on  an  historian  not  eminent  for  ac-  '-'  See  the  inst ructions  given  to  the  Eug- 

curacy  in  fact  or  precision  in  language,  lish    negotiators  in   1439,  at  length,  in 

If  his  expression  is  correct,  the   French  Hymer,  t.  x    p.  721. 

must  have  given  up  the  feudal  appeal  or  syillaret,  t.  xiv.  p. 

ressort   which    had    been  the  great  point  4  Amelgard,    from   whose    unpublished 

in    dispute    between    Edward    III.   and  memoirs  of  Charles  VII.  and  Louis  XI 


Fkance.  LOSS   OF  THEIR  CONQUESTS.  91 

with  collected  strength  to  the  contest,  and,  breaking  an  armis- 
tice upon  slight  pretences,  within  two  years  overwhelmed  the 
English  garrisons  in  each  of  these  provinces.  All  the  inher- 
itance of  Henry  II.  and  Eleanor,  all  the  conquests  of  Edward 
III.  and  Henry  V.  except  Calais  and  a  small  adjacent  district, 
were  irrecoverably  torn  from  the  crown  of  England.  A  barren 
title,  that  idle  trophy  of  disappointed  ambition,  was  preserved 
with  strange  obstinacy  to  our  own  age. 

In  these  second  English  wars  we  find  little  left  of  that  gen- 
erous  feeling  which  had,  in  general,  distinguished  condition 
the    contemporaries   of   Edward    III.     The    very  °f  prance 

.  .  \  n  -.         .,.  J    during  the 

virtues  which  a  state  of  hostility  promotes  are  not  second 
proof  against  its  long  continuance,  and  sink  at  last  Ensbsh  war8- 
into  brutal  fierceness.  Revenge  and  fear  excited  the  two 
factions  of  Orleans  and  Burgundy  to  all  atrocious  actions. 
The  troops  serving  under  partisans  on  detached  expedi- 
tions, according  to  the  system  of  the  war,  lived  at  free  quar- 
ters on  the  people.  The  histories  of  the  time  are  full  of 
their  outrages,  from  which,  as  is  the  common  case,  the  unpro- 
tected peasantry  most  suffered.1  Even  those  laws  of  war, 
which  the  courteous  sympathies  of  chivalry  had  enjoined, 
were  disregarded  by  a  merciless  fury.  Garrisons  surrendering 
after  a  brave  defence  were  put  to  death.  Instances  of  this  are 
very  frequent.  Henry  V.  excepts  Alain  Blanchard,  a  citizen 
who  had  distinguished  himself  during  the  siege,  from  the 
capitulation  of  Rouen,  and  orders  him  to  execution.  At  the 
taking  of  a  town  of  Champagne,  John  of  Luxemburg,  the 
Burgundian  general,  stipulates  that  every  fourth  and  sixth 
man    should   be   at   his   discretion ;  which  he   exercises  by 

Borne  valuable  extracts  are  made  in  the  si  non  de  crier  miserablement  a  Dieu 

Notices  des  Manuscrits,  t.  i.  p.  403,  attrib-  leur    creatcur    vengeance  ;   et    que    pis 

utes  the  delay  in  recovering  Normandy  estoit,  quand  ils  obtenoient  aucun  sauf- 

solely  to  the  king's  slothfulness  and  sen-  conduit  d'aucunscapitaines,  peuen  estoit 

suality.     Tn  fact  the  people  of  that  prov-  entretenu,  niesmenieut  tout  d'un  parti. 

ince  rose  upon  the  English  and  almost  part  ii.   fol.   139.     These   pillagers  were 

emancipated  themselves  with   little   aid  called  Ecorcheurs,  because  they  strippe.j 

from  Charles.  the  people  of  their  shirts.    And  this  namo 

1  Monstrelet,  passim.    A  long  metrical  superseded  that  of  Armagnacs,  by  which 

complaint  of  the  people  of  France,  cui'ious  one  side  had  hitherto  been  known.    Even 

as  a  specimen  of  versification,  as  well  as  Xaintrailles    and   La  Hire,    two   of    the 

a  testimony  to   the  misfortunes  of  the  bravest  champions  of  France,  were  dis- 

time,  may  be  found   in   this   historian,  graced  by  these  habits  of  outrage.     Ibid, 

part  i.   fol.   321.     Notwithstanding  the  fol.  144,  150,  175      Oliv.  de  la  Marche,  in 

treaty  of  Arras,  the  French  and  Burgun-  Collect,  des  Memoires,  t.  viii.  p.  25  ;  t.  v. 

iians  made  continual  incursions   upon  p.  323. 

each  other's  frontiers,  especially  about        Pour  la  plupart,  says  Villaret,  se  fair* 

Laon  and  in  the  Vermandois.     So  that  guorricr,  ou  voleur  de  grands  chemins. 

the  people  had  no  help,  says  Monstrelet,  signifioit  la  meme  chose. 


92  CONDITION  OF  FRANCE.      Chap.  I.  Tart  T! 

causing  them  all  to  be  hanged.1  Four  hundred  English  from 
Pontoise,  stormed  by  Charles  VII.  in  1441.  are  paraded  in 
chains  and  naked  through  the  streets  of  Paris,  and  thrown 
afterwards  into  the  Seine.  This  infamous  action  cannot  but 
be  ascribed  to  the  king.2 

At  the  expulsion  of  the  English,  France  emerged  from  the 

chaos  with  an  altered  character  and  new  features 
event^inthe  °^  government.  The  royal  authority  and  supreme 
reign  of  jurisdiction   of  the    parliament    were    universally 

recognized.  Yet  there  was  a  tendency  towards 
insubordination  left  among  the  great  nobility,  arising  in  part 
from  the  remains  of  old  feudal  privileges,  but  still  mure  from 
that  lax  administration  which,  in  the  convulsive  struggles  of 
the  war,  had  been  suffered  to  prevail.  In  the  south  were 
some  considerable  vassals,  the  nouses  of  Foix,  Albret,  and 
Armagnac,  who,  on  account  of  their  distance  from  the  seat  of 
empire,  had  always  maintained  a  very  independent  conduct. 
The  dukes  of  Britany  and  Burgundy  were  of  a  more  formi- 
dable character,  and  might  rather  be  ranked  among  foreign 
powers  than  privileged  subjects.  The  princes,  too,  of  the 
royal  blood,  who,  during  the  late  reign,  had  learned  to  partake 
or  contend  for  the  management,  were  ill-inclined  towards 
Charles  VII.,  himself  jealous,  from  old  recollections,  of  their 
ascendancy.  They  saw  that,  the  constitution  was  verging 
rapidly  towards  an  absolute  monarchy,  from  the  direction  of 
which  they  would  studiously  be  excluded.  This  apprehension 
gave  rise  to  several  attempts  at  rebellion  during  the  reign  of 
Charles  VII.,  and  to  the  war,  commonly  entitled,  for  the 
Public  Weal  (du  bien  public),  under  Louis  XI.  Among  the 
pretences  alleged  by  the  revolters  in  each  of  these,  the  injuries 
of  the  people  were  not  forgotten  ; 8  but  from  the  people  they 

i  Monstrelet,  part  ii.  f.  79.     This  John  luy  en  feit    occire    aucuns,    le  quel   y 

of  Luxemburg,  count  de  Ligny.  was  a  prenoit  grand  plaisir.   part  ii.  fol.  95. 
distinguished  captain  on  the  Burgundian        2  Villaret,  t.  xv.  p.  327. 
side,  and  for  a  long  time  would  not  ac-        3  The  confederacy   formed  at  Never* 

quiesce  in  the  treaty  of  Arras.     He  dis-  in   1441,  by  the   dukes  of  Orleans  and 

graced  himself  by  giving  up  to  the  duke  Bourbon,  with  many  other  jirinces,  made 

of  Bedford  his  prisoner  Joan  of  Arc  for  a  variety  of  demands,  all  relating  to  the 

10.000  francs.     The  famous  count  of  St.  grievances  which  different  classes  of  the 

Pol  was  his  nephew,  and  inherited  his  state,  or  individuals  among  themselves, 

great  possessions  in  the  county  of  Ver-  suffered    under    the    administration   of 

mandois.     Monstrelet  relates  a  singular  Charles.     These  may  be  found  at  length 

proof  of   the  good  education  which  his  in  Monstrelet,  pt.  ii.  f.   193;  and  are  a 

uncle  gave  him.     Some  prisoners  having  curious  document  of  the  change  which 

been  made  in  an  engagement,  si  fut  le  was  then  working  in  the  French  eonsti- 

jeune  conite  de  St.  Pol  mis  en  voye  de  tution.     In  his  answer  the  king  clainu 

guerre  ;  car  le  comte  de  Ligny  son  oncle  the  right,  in  urgent  cases,  of  levying  taxei 


France.  EVENTS    UNDER  CHARLES  VIi.  93 

received  small  support.  Weary  of  civil  dissension,  and 
anxious  for  a  strong  government  to  secure  them  from  depre- 
dation, the  French  had  no  inducement  to  intrust  even  their 
real  grievances  to  a  few  malcontent  princes,  whose  regard 
for  the  common  good  they  had  much  reason  to  distrust. 
Every  circumstance  favored  Charles  VII.  and  his  son  in  the 
attainment  of  arbitrary  power.  The  country  was  pillaged  by 
military  ruffians.  Some  of  these  had  been  led  by  the  dauphin 
to  a  war  in  Germany,  but  the  remainder  still  infested  the 
high  roads  and  villages.  Charles  established  his  companies 
of  ordonnance,  the  basis  of  the  French  regular  army,  in  order 
to  protect  the  country  from  such  depredators.  They  con- 
sisted of  about  nine  thousand  soldiers,  all  cavalry,  of  whom 
fifteen  hundred  were  heavy  armed ;  a  force  not  very  consid- 
erable, but  the  first,  except  mere  body-guards,  which  had  been 
raised  in  any  part  of  Europe  as  a  national  standing  army.1 
These  troops  were  paid  out  of  the  produce  of  a  permanent 
tax,  called  the  taille  ;  an  innovation  still  more  important  than 
the  former.  But  the  present  benefit  cheating  the  people,  now- 
prone  to  submissive  habits,  little  or  no  opposition  was  made, 
except  in  G-uienne,  the  inhabitants  of  which  had  speedy  reason 
to  regret  the  mild  government  of  England,  and  vainly  endeav- 
ored to  return  to  its  protection.2 

Tt  was  not  long  before  the  new  despotism  exhibited  itself 

without  waiting  for  the  consent  of  the  to  the  same  servitude  as    the  rest  of 

States-General.  France,  where  the  leeches  of  the  state 

1  Olivier  del  a  Marche  speaks  very  much  boldly  maintain  as  a  fundamental  maxim, 
in  favor  of  the  companies  of  ordonnance,  that  the  king  has  a  right  to  tax  all  his 
as  having  repressed  the  plunderers,  and  subjects  how  and  when  he  pleases  ;  which 
restored  internal  police.  Collect,  des  is  to  advance  that  in  France  no  man  has 
Memoires,  t.  viii.  p.  148.  Amelgard  pro-  anything  that  he  can  call  his  own,  and 
nounces  a  vehement  philippic  against  that  the  king  can  take  all  at  his  pleasure  ; 
them ;  but  it  is  probable  that  his  obser-  the  proper  condition  of  slaves,  whose 
vation  of  the  abuses  they  had  fallen  into  peculium  enjoyed  by  their  master's  per- 
was  confined  to  the  reign  of  Louis  XI.  mission  belongs  to  him,  like  their  persons, 
Notices  des  Manuscrits,  ubi  supra.  and  may  be   taken  away  whenever  he 

2  The  insurrection  of  Guienne  in  1462,  chooses.  Thus  situated,  the  people  of 
which  for  a  few  mouths  restored  that  Guienne,  especially  those  of  Bordeaux, 
province  to  the  English  crown,  is  ac-  alarmed  themselves,  and,  excited  by  some 
counted  for  in  the  curious  memoirs  of  of  the  nobility,  secretly  sought  about  for 
Amelgard,  above  mentioned.  It  pro-  means  to  regain  their  ancient  freedom  ; 
ceeded  solely  from  the  arbitrary  taxes  and  having  still  manv  connections  with 
imposed  by  Charles  VII.  in  order  to  persons  of  rank  in  England,  they  nego 
defray  the  expenses  of  his  regular  army,  tiated  with  them,  &c.  Notices  des  Manu- 
The  people  of  Bordeaux  complained  of  scrits,  p.  433.  The  same  cause  is  assigned 
exactions  not  only  contrary  to  their  an-  to  tbis  revolution  bv  Du  Clercq,  also  a 
cient  privileges,  but  to  the  positive  con-  contemporary  writer,  living  in  the  do- 
ditions  of  their  capitulation.  But  the  minions  of  Burgundy.  Collection  de« 
king  was  deaf  to  such  remonstrances.  Memoires,  t.  ix.  p.  400.  Villaret  has  not 
The  province  of  Guienne,  he  says,  then  known,  or  not  chosen  to  know  anvthinji 
perceived  that  it  was  meant  to  subject  it  of  ^he  matter. 


94  LOUIS  XI.  Chap.  I.  Part  ll. 

.  in  its  harshest  character.     Louis  XL,  son  of  Charles 

VII.,  who,  during  his  father's  reign,  had  been  con- 
nected  with   the   discontented   princes,   came   to    the    throne 
greatly  endowed  with  those  virtues  and  vices  which  conspire 
.  .„         to  the  success  of  a  kino;.     Laborious  vigilance  in 

A.D.  1461.  '-'  ~ 

His  char-  business,  contempt  of  pomp,  affability  to  inferiors, 
acter'  were  his  excellences  ;  qualities  especially  praise- 

worthy in  an  age  characterized  by  idleness,  love  of  pageantry, 
and  insolence.  To  these  virtues  he  added  a  perfect  knowledge 
of  all  persons  eminent  for  talents  or  influence  in  the  countries 
with  which  he  was  connected,  and  a  well-judged  bounty,  that 
thought  no  expense  wasted  to  draw  them  into  his  service  or 
interest.  In  the  fifteenth  century  this  political  art  had  hardly 
been  known,  except  perhaps  in  Italy  ;  the  princes  of  Europe 
had  contended  with  each  other  by  arms,  sometimes  by  treach- 
ery, but  never  with  such  complicated  subtlety  of  intrigue* 
Of  that  insidious  cunning,  which  has  since  been  brought  to 
perfection,  Louis  XL  may  be  deemed  not  absolutely  the 
inventor,  but  the  most  eminent  improver  ;  and  its  success  has 
led,  perhaps,  to  too  high  an  estimate  of  his  abilities.  Like 
most  bad  men,  he  sometimes  fell  into  his  own  snare,  and  was 
betrayed  by  his  confidential  ministers,  because  his  confidence 
was  generally  reposed  in  the  wicked.  And  his  dissimulation 
was  so  notorious,  his  tyranny  so  oppressive,  that  he  was  nat- 
urally surrounded  by  enemies,  and  had  occasion  for  all  his 
craft  to  elude  those  rebellions  and  confederacies  which  mipht 
perhaps  not  have  been  raised  against  a  more  upright  sover- 
eign.1 At  one  time  the  monarchy  was  on  the  point  of  sinking 
before  a  combination  which  would  have  ended  in  dismember- 
ing France.  This  was  the  league  denominated  of  the  Public 
League  Weal,  in  which  all  the  princes  and  great  vassals  of 

denominated  the  French  crown  were  concerned  :  the  dukes  of 
WeaL  U  C  Britany,  Burgundy,  Alencon,  Bourbon,  the  count 
a.d.  1461.  of  Dunois,  so  renowned  for  his  valor  in  the  English 
wars,  the  families  of  Foix  and  Armagnac  ;  and  at  the  head 

1  Sismondi  (vol.  xiv.  p.  312)  and  Mich-  against  his  enemies,  and  especially  against 

elet  (vol.  ix.  p.  347)  agree  in  thinking  his  rebellious  subjects.     Louis  composed 

Louis  XI.  no  worse  than  other  kings  of  for  his  son's  use,  or  caused  to  be  com 

his  age  ;  in  fact  the  former  seems  rarely  posed  a  political    treatise  entitled   '  Le 

to  make  a  distinction  between  one  king  Rosier  des   Guerres,'   which   has    never 

and  another.     Louis  was  just  and  even  been  published,     it  is  written  in  a  spirit 

attentive  towards  the  lower  people,  and  of  public  morality  verv  unlike  his  prac- 

spared  the  blood  of  his  soldiers.     But  he  dee.    (Sismondi,  vol.  xiv.  p.  616.)    Thus 

had  imbibed  a  notion  that  treachery  and  two  royal  Anti-Machiavels  have  satirized 

cruelty   could    not    be    carried    too   far  themselves. 


France.  LEAGUE  OF  THE  PUBLIC  WEAL.  —  APPANAGES.     93 

of  all,  Charles  duke  of  Berry,  the  king's  brother  and  pre 
sumptive  heir.  So  unanimous  a  combination  was  not  formed 
without  a  strong  provocation  from  the  king,  or  at  least  with- 
out weighty  grounds  for  distrusting  his  intentions  ;  but  the 
more  remote  cause  of  this  confederacy,  as  of  those  which  had 
been  raised  against  Charles  VII.,  was  the  critical  position  of 
the  feudal  aristocracy  from  the  increasing  power  of  the  crown. 
This  war  of  the  Public  Weal  was,  in  fact,  a  struggle  to  pre- 
serve their  independence  ;  and  from  the  weak  character  of 
the  duke  of  Berry,  whom  they  would,  if  successful,  have 
placed  upon  the  throne,  it  is  possible  that  France  might  have 
been  in  a  manner  partitioned  among  them  in  the  event  of 
their  success,  or,  at  least,  that  Burgundy  and  Britany  would 
have  thrown  off  the  sovereignty  that  galled  them.1 

The  strength  of  the  confederates  in  this  war  much  exceeded 
that  of  the  king ;  but  it  was  not  judiciously  employed  ;  and 
after  an  indecisive  battle  at  Montlhery  they  failed  in  the  great 
object  of  reducing  Paris,  which  would  have  obliged  Louis  to 
fly  from  his  dominions.  It  was  his  policy  to  promise  every 
thing,  in  trust  that  fortune  would  afford  some  opening  to 
repair  his  losses  and  give  scope  to  his  superior  prudence. 
Accordingly,  by  the  treaty  of  Conflans,  he  not  only  surren- 
dered afresh  the  towns  upon  the  Somme,  which  he  had  lately 
redeemed  from  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  but  invested  his  brother 
with  the  duchy  of  Normandy  as  his  appanage. 

The  term  appanage  denotes  the  provision  made  for  th» 
younger  children  of  a  king  of  France.    This  always 
consisted  of  lands  and  feudal  superiorities  held  of      PPana&es- 
the  crown  by  the  tenure  of  peerage.     It  is  evident  that  this 
usage,  as  it  produced  a  new  class  of  powerful  feudataries,  was 
hostile  to  the  interests  and  policy  of  the  sovereign,  and  re- 
tarded the  subjugation  of  the  ancient  aristocracy.     But  an 
usage  coeval  with  the  monarchy  was  not  to  be  abrogated,  and 
the  scarcity  of  money  rendered  it  impossible  to  provide  for  the 
younger  branches  of  the  royal  family  by  any  other  means.    It 
was  restrained,  however,  as  far  as  circumstances  would  permit. 
Philip  IV.  declared  that  the  county  of  Poitiers,  bestowed  by 

1  Si8moDdi  has  a  just  observation  on  ete  proclame  ;  c'est  que  le  bien  public 

the  League  of  the   Public  Weal.     "Le  doit  etre  le  but  du  gouvernenient ;  niais 

noin  seul  du  Bien  Public,  qui  fut  donne  les  princes  qui  s'associaient  pour  l'obtenir 

a  cette  ligue,  etait  un  hommage  au  pro-  etaient  encore  bien  peu  en  etat  de  con 

gres  des  lumieres  ;  c'etait  la  profession  naitre  sa  nature  "    (xiv  161.) 
ij'un  principe  qui  n'avait  point  encore 


36  APPANAGES.  Chap.  I.  Part  II 

him  on  his  son,  diould  revert  to  the  crown  on  the  extinction 
of  male  heirs.  But  this,  though  an  important  precedent,  was 
not,  as  has  often  been  asserted,  i  general  law.  Charles  V. 
limited  the  appanages  of  his  own  son-  to  twelve  thousand 
livres  of  annual  value  in  land.  By  means  of  their  appanages, 
and  through  the  operation  of  the  Salic  law,  which  made  their 
inheritance  of  the  crown  a  less  remote  contingency,  the  princes 
of  the  blood  royal  in  France  were  at  all  times  (for  the  remark 
is  applicable  long  after  Louis  XL)  a  distinct  and  formidable 
class  of  men,  whose  influence  was  always  disadvantageous  to 
the  reigning  monarch,  and,  in  general,  to  the  people. 

No  appanage  had  ever  been  granted  to  France  so  enormous 
as  the  duchy  of  Normandy.  One  third  of  the  whole  national 
revenue,  it  is  declared,  was  derived  from  that  rich  province. 
Louis  could  not,  therefore,  sit  down  under  such  terms  as,  with 
his  usual  insincerity,  he  had  accepted  at  Conflans.  In  a  very 
short  time  he  attacked  Normandy,  and  easily  compelled  his 
brother  to  take  refuge  in  Britany ;  nor  were  his  enemies  ever 
able  to  procure  the  restitution  of  Charles's  appanage.  Dur- 
ing the  rest  of  his  reign  Louis  had  powerful  coalitions  to  with- 
stand ;  but  his  prudence  and  compliance  with  circumstances, 
joined  to  some  mixture  of  good  fortune,  brought  him  safely 
through  his  perils.  The  duke  of  Britany,  a  prince  of  moder- 
ate talents,  was  unable  to  make  any  formidable  impression, 
though  generally  leagued  with  the  enemies  of  the  king.  The 
less  powerful  vassals  were  successfully  crushed  by  Louis  with 
decisive  vigor;  the  duchy  of  Alencon  was  confiscated;  the 
count  of  Armagnac  was  assassinated  ;  the  duke  of  Nemours,  and 
the  constable  of  St.  Pol,  a  politician  as  treacherous  as  Louis, 
who  had  long  betrayed  both  him  and  the  duke  of  Burgundy, 
suffered  upon  the  scaffold.  The  king's  brother  Charles,  after 
disquieting  him  for  many  years,  died  suddenly  in  Guienne, 
which  had  finally  been  granted  as  his  appanage,  with  strong 
suspicions  of  having  been  poisoned  by  the  king's 
contrivance.1  Edward  IV.  of  England  was  too 
dissipated  and  too  indolent  to  be  fond  of  war  ;  and,  though  he 
once  entered  France  with  an  army  more  considera- 
ble than  could  have  been  expected  after  such  civil 
bloodshed  as  England  had  witnessed,  he  was  induced,  by  the 


1  Sisniondi,  however,  and  Mlchelet  do    was  poisoned  by  his  brother  ;  he  had  been 
not  believe   that  the   duke  of  Guienne    ill  for  several  months. 


Fkance.  HOUSE  OF  BURGUNDY.  97 

stipulation  of  a  large  pension,  to  give  up  the  entei prise.1  Sc 
terrible  was  still  in  France  the  apprehension  of  an  English 
war,  that  Louis  prided  himself  upon  no  part  of  his  policy  so 
much  as  the  warding  this  blow.  Edward  showed  a  desire  to 
vi^it  Paris  ;  but  the  king  gave  him  no  invitation,  lest,  he  said, 
bis  brother  should  find  some  handsome  women  there,  who 
might  tempt  him  to  return  in  a  different  manner.  Hastings, 
Howard,  and  others  of  Edward's  ministers,  were  secured  by 
>ribes  in  the  interest  of  Louis,  which  the  first  of  these  did 
not  scruple  to  receive  at  the  same  time  from  the  duke  of 
Burgundy.2 

This  was    the  most   powerful   enemy  whom   the  craft  of 
Louis  had  to  counteract.     In  the  last  days  of  the  feudal  sys- 
tem, when  the  house  of  Capet  had  almost  achieved  the  subju- 
gation of  those  proud  vassals  among  whom  it  had    House  of 
been  originally  numbered,  a  new  antagonist  sprung   Bursundy 
up  to  dispute  the  field  against  the   crown.     John   siv/acquT 
king  of  France  granted  the  duchy  of  Burgundy,  by   sitfons. 
way  of  appanage,  to  his  third  son,  Philip.     By  his  marriage 
with  Margaret,  heiress  of  Louis  count  of  Flanders,  Philip  ac- 
quired that  province,  Artois,  the  county  of  Burgundy  (or  Fran- 
che-comte),  and  the  Nivernois.     Philip  the  Good,  his  grandson, 
who  carried  the  prosperity  of  this  family  to  its  height,  pos- 
sessed himself,  by  various  titles,  of  the  several  other  provinces 
which   composed  the  Netherlands.     These  were  fiefs  of  the 
empire,  but  latterly  not  much  dependent  upon  it,  and  alienated 
by  their  owners  without  its  consent.     At  the  peace  of  Arras 
the  districts  of  Macon  and  Auxerre  were  absolutely  ceded  to 
Philip,  and  great  part  of  Picardy  conditionally  made  over  to 
him,  redeemable   on  the  payment  of  four   hundred   thousand 
crowns.3     These  extensive,  though   not    compact    dominions, 

iThe  army  of  Edward  consisted  of  will  not  hare  it  said  that  the  Great 
1,500  men  at  arms  and  14,000  archers ;  Chamberlain  of  England  is  a  pensioner 
the  whole  very  well  appointed.  Comines,  of  the  king  of  France,  nor  have  my 
t.  xi.  p.  238.  There  seems  to  have  been  name  appear  in  the  books  of  the  Cham- 
a  great  expectation  of  what  the  English  bres  des  Comptes."  Ibid. 
would  do,  and  great  fears  entertained  by  3  The  duke  of  Burgundy  was  person- 
Louis,  who  grudged  no  expense  to  get  ally  excused  from  all  homage  and  service 
rid  of  them.  to  Charles  VII.;    but,  if  either  died,  il 

2  Comines,  1.  vi.  c.  2.  Hastings  had  was  to  be  paid  by  the  heir,  or  to  the 
the  mean  cunning  to  refuse  to  give  his  heir.  Accordingly,  on  Charles's  death 
receipt  for  the  pension  he  took  from  Philip  did  homage  to  Louis.  This  ex- 
Louis  XI.  "  This  present,  he  said  to  the  eruption  can  hardly,  therefore,  have  been 
king's  agent,  comes  from  your  master's  inserted  to  gratify  the  pride  of  Philip,  as 
good  pleasure,  and  not  at  my  request ;  historians  suppose.  Is  it  not  probable 
and  if  you  mean  I  should  receive  it,  you  that,  during  his  resentment  against 
may  put  it  here  into  my  sleeve,  but  you  Charles,  he  might  have  made  some  voif 
bhall  have  no  discharge  from  me;  for  I  never  to   do   him   homage;    which   thia 

VOL.  I,  — M.  7 


98  CHARLES  OF  BURGUNDY.      Chap.  I.  Part  II 

were  abundant  in  population  and  wealth,  fertile  in  corn, 
wine,  and  salt,  and  full  of  commercial  activity.  Thirty 
years  of  peace  which  followed  the  treaty  of  Arras,  with  a 
mild  and  free  government,  raised  the  subjects  of  Burgundy  to 
a  degree  of  prosperity  quite  unparalleled  in  these  times  of 
disorder,  and  this  was  displayed  in  general  sumptuousness  of 
dress  and  feasting.  The  court  of  Philip  and  of  his  son 
Charles  was  distinguished  for  its  pomp  and  riches,  for  pag 
eants  and  tournaments ;  the  trappings  of  chivalry,  perhaps 
without  its  spirit ;  for  the  military  character  of  Burgundy  had 
been  impaired  by  long  tranquillity.1 

During  the  lives  of  Philip  and  Charles  VII.  each  under- 
oharacter  stood  the  other's  rank,  and  their  amity  was  little  in 
of  Charles  terrupted.  But  their  successors,  the  most  opposite 
Burgundy.  °f  human  kind  in  character,  had  one  common 
quality,  ambition,  to  render  their  antipathy  more 
powerful.  Louis  was  eminently  timid  and  suspicious  in  policy ; 
Charles  intrepid  beyond  all  men,  and  blindly  presumptuous : 
Louis  stooped  to  any  humiliation  to  reach  his  aim ;  Charles 
was  too  haughty  to  seek  the  fairest  means  of  strengthen- 
ing his  party.  An  alliance  of  his  daughter  with  the  duke 
of  Guienne,  brother  of  Louis,  was  what  the  malecontent 
French  princes  most  desired  and  the  king  most  dreaded ;  but 
Charles,  either  averse  to  any  French  connection,  or  willing 
to  keep  his  daughter's  suitors  in  dependence,  would  never 
directly  accede  to  that  or  any  other  proposition  for  her  mar- 
riage. On  Philip's  death  in  1467,  he  inherited  a  great  treasure, 
which  he  soon  wasted  in  the  prosecution  of  his  schemes.  These 
were  so  numerous  and  vast,  that  he  had  not  time  to  live,  says 
Comines,  to  complete  them,  nor  would  one  half  of  Europe 
have  contented  him.     It  was  his  intention  to  assume  the  title 

reservation  in  the  treaty  was  intended  to  treaty   Philip  is  entitled   duke   by  the 

preserve?  grace  of  God;    whi'-h   was   reckoned  a 

It  is  remarkable  that  Villaret  says  the  mark  of  independence,  and  not  usually 

duke   of  Burgundy   was    positively   ex-  permitted  to  a  vassal . 
cused  by  the  25th  article  of  the  peace  of         '  P.  de  Comines,  1.  i.  c.  2  and  3;    1.  v 

Arras  from  doing  homage  to  Charles,  or  c.  9.     Du  Clercq,  in  Collection   des   Me 

his  successors  kings  of  France,  t.  xvi.  p.  moires,  t.  ix.   \>.  389.     In  the  investiture 

404.     For  this  assertion  too  he  seems  to  granted  by  John  to  the  first  Philip  of 

quote    the  Tresor    des   Chartes,    where,  Burgundy,  a    reservation   is   made  that 

probably,  the  original  treaty  is  preserved,  the  royal  taxes  shall  be  levied  throughout 

Nevertheless,   it    appears    otherwise,   as  that  appanage.      But    .luring   the   long 

published  by  Monstrelet  at  full  length,  hostility  between  the  kingdom  and  duchy 

who  could  have  no  motive  to  falsify  it ;  this  could  not  have  been  enforced  :  and 

and  Philip's  conduct  in  doing  homage  to  by  the   treaty  of  Arras  Charles  surren- 

Louis  is  hardly  compatible  with  Villaret's  dered  all  right  to  tax  the  duke's  domin 

M**rtion.       Daniel     copies     Monstrelet  ions.     Monstrelet,  f.  114 
without  any  observation.    In  the  same 


France.  INSUBORDINATION  OF  THE  FLEMISH  CITIES.  CJ9 

of  King;  and  the  emperor  Frederic  TIL  was  at  one  time  act- 
ually on  his  road  to  confer  this  dignity,  when  some  suspicion 
caused  him  to  retire,  and  the  project  was  never  renewed.1  It 
is  evident  that,  if  Charles's  capacity  had  borne  any  propor- 
tion to  his  pride  and  courage,  or  if  a  prince  less  politic  than 
Louis  XI.  had  been  his  contemporary  in  France,  the  prov- 
ince of  Burgundy  must  have  been  lost  to  the  monarchy.  For 
several  years  these  great  rivals  were  engaged,  sometimes  in 
open  hostility,  sometimes  in  endeavors  to  overreach  each 
other;  but  Charles,  though  not  much  more  scrupulous,  was 
far  less  an  adept  in  these  mysteries  of  politics  than  the  king. 

Notwithstanding  the  power  of  Burgundy,  there  were  some 
disadvantages    in    its    situation.      It  presented   (I   x     .     „ 

Insiibordi* 

speak  of  all  Charles's  dominions  under  the  com-  nation  of 
mon  name,  Burgundy)  a  very  exposed  frontier  on  *ftieJlem,sh 
the  side  of  Germany  and  Switzerland,  as  well  as 
France  ;  and  Louis  exerted  a  considerable  influence  over  the 
adjacent  princes  of  the  empire  as  well  as  the  United  Cantons. 
The  people  of  Liege,  a  very  populous  city,  had  for  a  long 
time  been  continually  rebelling  against  their  bishops,  who 
were  the  allies  of  Burgundy ;  Louis  was  of  course  not  back- 
ward to  foment  their  insurrections,  which  sometimes  gave  the 
dukes  a  good  deal  of  trouble.  The  Flemings,  and  especially 
the  people  of  Ghent,  had  been  during  a  century  noted  for 
their  republican  spirit  and  contumacious  defiance  of  their  sov- 
ereign. Liberty  never  wore  a  more  unamiable  countenance 
than  among  these  burghers,  who  abused  the  strength  she 
gave  them  by  cruelty  and  insolence.  Ghent,  when  Froissart 
wrote,  about  the  year  1400,  was  one  of  the  strongest  cities  in 
Europe,  and  would  have  required,  he  says,  an  army  of  two 
hundred  thousand  men  to  besiege  it  on  every  side,  so  as  to 
shut  up  all  access  by  the  Lys  and  Scheldt.  It  contained 
eighty  thousand  men  of  age  to  bear   arms ; 2   a  calculation 

l  Gamier,  t.  xviii.  p.  62.     It  is  observa-  tained  to  the  French  crown,  with  Fran- 

ble  that  Comines  says  not  aword  of  this;  che-comte and  other  countries  which  had 

for  which  Gamier  seems  to  quote  Belca-  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Burguudy. 

rius,  a  writer  of  the  sixteenth  age.     But  Hence  he  talked  at  Dijon,  in  1473,  to  the 

even   Philip,    when  Morvilliers,  Louis's  estates  of  the  former,  about  the  kingdom 

chancellor,  used  menaces   towards  him,  of  Burgundy,  "  que  ceux  de  France  ont 

interrupted  the  orator  with  these  words  :  longtems    usurpe  et  d'icelui  fait  duche ; 

Je  veux  que  chacunseache  que,  sij'eusse  que  tous  les  sujets  doivent  bien  avoir  & 

vonlu,   je   fusse  roi.      Villaret,  t.   xvii.  regret,  et  dit  qu'il  avait  en  soi  des  choses 

p.  44.  qu'il   n'appartenait  de  savoir  a  nul  qu'£ 

Charles  had  a  vague  notion  of  history,  lui."     Michelet  (ix.  162)  is  the  first  who 

and  confounded  the  province  or   duchy  has  published  this, 

of  Burgundy,  which   had  always  apper-  2  Froissart,  part  ii.  o.  67- 


100  THE  FLEMISH  CITIES.        Ciiai-.  I.  1'abt  i\ 

which,  altliough,  as  I  presume,  much  exaggerated,  is  evidence 
of  great  actual  populousness.  Such  a  city  was  absolutely  im- 
pregnable at  a  time  when  artillery  was  very  imperfect  both  in 
its  construction  and  management.  Hence,  though  the  citizens 
of  Ghent  were  generally  beaten  in  the  field  with  great  slaugh- 
ter, they  obtained  tolerable  terms  from  their  masters,  who 
knew  the  danger  of  forcing  them  to  a  desperate  defence. 

No  taxes  were  raised  in  Flanders,  or  indeed  throughout 
the  dominions  of  Burgundy,  without  consent  of  the  three  es- 
tates. In  the  time  of  Philip  not  a  great  deal  of  money  was 
levied  upon  the  people  ;  but  Charles  obtained  every  year  a 
pretty  large  subsidy,  which  he  expended  in  the  hire  of  Ital- 
ian and  English  mercenaries.1  An  almost  uninterrupted  suc- 
cess had   attended  his  enterprises  for  a  length  of  time,  and 

rendered  his   disposition    still  more    overweening. 

His  first  failure  -  was  before  Neuss,  a  little  town 
near  Cologne,  the  possession  of  which  would  have  made  him 
nearly  master  of  the  whole  course  of  the  Rhine,  for  he  had 
already  obtained  the  landgraviate  of  Alsace.  Though  com- 
pelled to  raise  the  siege,  he  succeeded  in  occupying,  next  year, 
the  duchy  of  Lorraine.  But  his  overthrow  was  reserved  for 
an  enemy  whom  he  despised,  and  whom  none  could  have 
..,.  thought  equal  to  the  contest.    The  Swiss  had  given 

him  some  slight  provocation,  for  which  they  were 
ready  to  atone ;  but  Charles  was  unused  to  forbear ;  and 
perhaps  Switzerland  came  within  his  projects  of  conquest. 
At  Granson,  in  the  Pays  de  Vaud,  he  was  entirely  routed, 
with    more    disgrace    than    slaughter.2      But    having    reas- 


i  Comines,  1.  iv.  c.  13.     It  was  very  re-  doute  faisoient  les  sujets,  et   pour  plu 

luctantly  that  the  Flemings  granted  any  sieurs  raisons,  de  se  mettre  en  eette  su- 

money.     Philip   once  begged  for  a  tax  jetion  oil    ils  voyoient    le  royanme   de 

on  salt,  promising  never  to  ask  anything  France,  a  cause  de  ses  gens  d*arnies.   Ala 

more  ;  but  the  people  of  Ghent,  and,  in  verite,  leur  grand  doute  n'estoit  pas  sans 

imitation  of  them,  the  whole  county,  re-  cause  ;  car  i|iiand  il  se  trouva  cinq  cens 

fused  it.     Du  Clercq,  p.  389.     Upon  his  homines  d'armes.  la  volonte  luy  vintd'en 

przteuce  of  taking  the  cross,  they  granted  avoir  plus,  et  de  plus   hardiment  entre- 

hini  a  subsidy,  though  less  than  he  had  prendre contre  tous  ses  voisins.    Comines, 

requested,  on   condition   that  it  should  1.  iii.  c.  4,  9. 

not  be  levied  if  the  crusade  did  not  take  Du  Clercq,  a  contemporary  writer  of 
place,  which  put  an  end  to  the  attempt,  very  good  authority,  mentioning  the 
The  states  knew  well  that  the  duke  would  story  of  a  certain  widow  who  had  re- 
employ any  money  they  gave  him  in  keep-  married  the  day  after  her  husband's 
ing  up  a  body  of  gens-d'armes,  like  his  death,  says  that  she  was  in  some  degree 
neighbor,  the  king  of  France;  and  though  e\<  usable,  because  it  was  the  practice  of 
the  want  of  such  a  force  exposed  their  the  duke  and  his  officers  to  force  rich  wid- 
country  to  pillage,  they  were  too  good  owb  into  marrying  their  soldiers  or  othet 
patriots  to  place  the  means  of  enslaving  servants,  t.  ix.  p.  418. 
It  iu  the  hands  of  their  sovereign.    Grand  -A    famous    diamond,    belonging     U 


France  CLAIM  OF  LOUIS  XI  101 

sembled  his  troops,  and  met  the  confederate  army    Defeats  of 
of  Swiss  and  Germans  at  Morat,  near  Friburg,  he    Granson* 
was  again  defeated  with  vast  loss.     On   this  day   *nd  Morat. 
the    power    of   Burgundy    was    dissipated :    deserted  by  his 
allies,  betrayed  by  his  mercenaries,  he  set  his  life    ms  death, 
upon   another   cast    at    Nancy,   desperately  giving   A-D- 1477- 
battle  to  the  duke  of  Lorraine  with  a  small  dispirited  army, 
and  perished  in  the  engagement. 

Now  was  the  moment  when  Louis,  who  had  held  back 
while  his  enemy  was  breaking  his  force  against  the  claim  of 
rocks  of  Switzerland,  came  to  gather  a  harvest  ^j^i^ 
which  his  labor  had  not  reaped.  Charles  left  an  cession  of 
only  daughter,  undoubted  heiress  of  Flanders  and  Bur£undy 
Artois,  as  well  as  of  his  dominions  out  of  France,  but  whose 
right  of  succession  to  the  duchy  of  Burgundy  was  more  ques- 
tionable. Originally  the  great  fiefs  of  the  crown  descended  to 
females,  and  this  was  the  case  with  respect  to  the  two  first 
mentioned.  But  John  had  granted  Burgundy  to  his  son 
Philip  by  wray  of  appanage ;  and  it  was  contended  that  the 
appanages  reverted  to  the  crown  in  default  of  male  heirs. 
In  the  form  of  Philip's  investiture,  the  duchy  was  granted  to 
him  and  his  lawful  heirs,  without  designation  of  sex.  The 
construction,  therefore,  must  be  left  to  the  established  course 
of  law.  This,  however,  was  by  i)e  means  acknowledged  by 
Mary,  Charles's  daughter,  who  maintained  both  that  no  gen- 
eral law  restricted  appanages  to  male  heirs,  and  that  Bur- 
gundy had  always  been  considered  as  a  feminine  fief,  John 
himself  having  possessed  it,  not  by  reversion  as  king  (for 
descendants  of  the  first  dukes  were  then  living),  but  by  inher- 
itance derived  through  females.1  Such  was  this  question  of 
succession  between  Louis  XL  and  Mary  of  Burgundy,  upon 

Charles  of  Burgundy,  was  taken  in  the  female  succession  ;  thus  Artois  had  pass- 
plunder  of  his  tent  by  the  Swiss  at  Gran-  ed,  by  a  daughter  of  Louis  le  Male,  into 
son.  After  several  changes  of  owners,  the  house  of  Burgundy.  As  to  the  above- 
most  of  whom  were  ignorant  of  its  value,  mentioned  ordinances,  the  first  applies 
it  became  the  first  jewel  in  the  French  only  to  the  county  of  Poitiers  ;  the  sec- 
crown.  Gamier,  t.  xviii.  p.  361.  ond  does  not  contain  a  syllable  that  re- 
1  It  is  advanced  with  too  much  confi-  lates  to  succession.  (Ordonnances  des 
deuce  by  several  French  historians,  either  Rois,  t.  vi.  p.  54.)  The  doctrine  of  ex- 
that  the  ordinances  of  Philip  IV.  and  eluding  female  heirs  was  more  consonant 
Charles  V.  constituted  a  general  law  to  the  pretended  Salic  Law,  and  the  re- 
against  the  descent  of  appanages  to  fe-  cent  principles  as  to  inalienability  of  do- 
male  heirs,  or  that  this  was  a  fundament-  main  thau  to  the  analogy  of  feudal  rules 
al  law  of  the  monarchy.  Du  Clos,  Hist,  and  precedents.  M.  Gaillard,  in  his  Ob- 
de  Louis  XI.  t.  ii.  p.  252.  Gamier,  Ilist.  servations  sur  1'IIistoire  de  Velly.  Villa- 
ge France,  t.  xviii.  p.  258.  The  latter  po-  ret.  et  Gamier,  has  a  judicious  note  or 
dtion  is  refuted  by  frequent  instances  of  Miis  subject,  t.  iii.  p.  804. 


102  CONDUCT  OF  LOUIS.         Chap.  1.  Part  II 

the  merits  <jf  whose  pretensions  I  will  not  pretend  altogether 
to  decide,  but  shall  only  observe  that,  if  Charles  had  con- 
ceived his  daughter  to  be  excluded  from  this  part  of  his  in- 
heritance, he  would  probably,  at  Conflans  or  Pcronne,  where 
he  treated  upon  the  vantage-ground,  have  attempted  at  least 
to  obtain  a  renunciation  of  Louis's  claim. 

There  was  one  obvious  mode  of  preventing  all  further  con- 
Conduct  of  test  and  of  aggrandizing  the  French  monarchy  far 
Louis.  more  than  by  the  reunion  of  Burgundy.     This  was 

the  marriage  of  Mary  with  the  Dauphin,  which  was  ardently 
wished  in  France.  Whatever  obstacles  might  occur  to  this 
connection,  it  was  natural  to  expect  on  the  opposite  side  — 
from  Mary's  repugnance  to  an  infant  husband,  or  from  the 
jealousy  which  her  subjects  were  likely  to  entertain  of  being 
incorporated  with  a  country  worse  governed  than  their  own. 
The  arts  of  Louis  would  have  been  well  employed  in  smooth- 
ing these  impediments.1  But  he  chose  to  seize  upon  as  many 
towns  as,  in  those  critical  circumstances,  lay  exposed  to  him, 
and  stripped  the  young  duchess  of  Artois  and  Franche-comte\ 
Expectations  of  the  marriage  he  sometimes  held  out,  but,  as 
it  seems,  without  sincerity.  Indeed  he  contrived  irreconcila- 
bly to  alienate  Mary  by  a  shameful  perfidy,  betraying  the 
ministers  whom  she  had  intrusted  upon  a  secret  mission  to  the 
people  of  Ghent,  who  put  them  to  the  torture,  and  afterwards 
to  death,  in  the  presence  and  amidst  the  tears  and  supplications 
of  their  mistress.  Thus  the  French  alliance  becoming  odious 
a  d  1477  m  France,  this  princess  married  Maximilian  of 
Austria,  son  of  the  emperor  Frederic  —  a  connec- 
tion which  Louis  strove  to  prevent,  though  it  was  impossible 
then  to  foresee  that  it  was  ordained  to  retard  the  growth  of 
France  and  to  bias  the  fate  of  Europe  during  three  hun- 
dred years.  This  war  lasted  till  after  the  death  of  Mary,  who 
left  one  son,  Philip,  and  one  daughter,  Margaret.  By  a  treaty 
of  peace  concluded  at  Arras,  in  1482,  it  was  agreed  that  this 
daughter  should  become  the  dauphin's   wife,  with  Franche- 

i  Robertson,  as  well  as  some  other  mod-  put  a  new  house  of  Burgundy  at  the 

erns,  have  maintained,  on  the  authority  head  of  those  princes  whose  confedera- 

of   Coniines,  that   Louis  XI.   ought    in  cies  had  so  often  endangered  the  crown, 

policy  to  have  married  the  young  prin-  Comines  is  one  of  the  most  judicious  of 

cess   to  the  count  of  Angouleme,  father  historians;    but    his    sincerity    in;iv    be 

of  Francis   I.,  a    connection  which  she  rather  doubtful  in  the    opinion   above 

would  not  have  disliked.     But  certainly  mentioned  ;  for  he  wrote  iu  the  reign  of 

nothing  could  have  been  more  adverse  to  Charles  VIII.,  when  the  count,  of    An- 

the   interests   of   the  French   monarchy  gouleme  was  engaged  in  the  same  faction 

toau  such  a  marriage,  which  would  have  as  himself. 


France.  HIS  SICKNESS  AND  DEATH.  103 

comte  and  Artois,  which  Louis  held  already,  for  her  dowry, 
to  be  restored  in  case  the  marriage  should  not  take  effect 
The  homage  of  Flanders  was  reserved  to  the  crown. 

Meanwhile  Louis  was  lingering  in  disease  and  torments  of 
mind,  the  retribution  of  fraud  and  tyranny.  Two  _.  , 
years  before  his  death  he  was  struck  with  an  apo-  and  death  c? 
plexy,  from  which  he  never  wholly  recovered.  As  Loms  XL 
he  felt  his  disorder  increasing,  he  shut  himself  up  in  a  palace 
near  Tours,  to  hide  from  the  world  the  knowledge  of  his  de- 
cline.1 His  solitude  was  like  that  of  Tiberius  at  Capreae,  full 
of  terror  and  suspicion,  and  deep  consciousness  of  universal 
hatred.  All  ranks,  he  well  knew,  had  their  several  injuries 
to  remember :  the  clergy,  wdiose  liberties  he  had  sacrificed  to 
the  see  of  Rome,  by  revoking  the  Pragmatic  Sanction  of 
Charles  VII. ;  the  princes,  whose  blood  he  had  poured  upon 
the  scaffold  ;  the  parliament,  whose  course  of  justice  he  had 
turned  aside  ;  the  commons,  wrho  groaned  under  his  extortion, 
and  were  plundered  by  his  soldiery.'2  The  palace,  fenced 
with  portcullises  and  spikes  of  iron,  was  guarded  by  archers 
and  cross-bow  men,  who  shot  at  any  that  approached  by  night. 
Few  entered  this  den ;  but  to  them  he  showed  himself  in 
magnificent  apparel,  contrary  to  his  former  custom,  hoping 
thus  to  disguise  the  change  of  his  meagre  body.  He  dis- 
trusted his  friends  and  kindred,  his  daughter  and  his  son,  the 
last  of  whom  he  had  not  suffered  even  to  read  or  write,  lest 
he  should  too  soon  become  his  rival.  No  man  ever  so  much 
feared  death,  to  avert  which  he  stooped  to  every  meanness 
and  sought  every  remedy.  His  physician  had  sworn  that  if 
he  were  dismissed  the  king  would  not  survive  a  week  ;  and 
Louis,  enfeebled  by  sickness  and  terror,  bore  the  rudest  "jsage 
from  this  man,  and  endeavored  to  secure  his  services  by  vast 
rewards.  Always  credulous  in  relics,  though  seldom  re- 
strained by  superstition  from  any  crime,8  he  eagerly  bought 

1  For  Louis's  illness  and  death  see  than  1,800,000 francs  a  year  in  taxes;  but 
Conines,  1.  vi.  c  7-12,  and  Gamier,  t.  Louis  XT.,  at  the  time  of  his  death,  raised 
six.  p.  112,  &c.  Plessis,  his  last  resi-  4,700,000,  exclusive  of  some  military  im- 
dence,  about  an  English  mile  from  Tours,  positions;  et  surement  e'estoit  com  pas 
is  now  a  dilapidated  farm-house,  and  can  sion  de  voir  et  scavoir  la  pauvrete  du 
never  have  been  a  very  large  building,  peuple.  In  this  chapter  he  declares  his 
The  vestiges  of  royalty  about  it  are  few;  opinion  that  no  king  can  justly  levy 
but  the  principal  apartments  have  been  money  on  his  subjects  without  their  con- 
destroyed,  either  in  the  course  of  ages  or  sent,  and  repels  all  common  arguments 
at  the  revolution.  to  the  contrary. 

2  See  a  remarkable  chapter  in  Philip  de  3  An  exception  to  this  was  when  he 
Comines,  1.  iv.  e.  19,  wherein  he  tells  us  swore  by  the  cross  of  St.  Lo,  after  which 
that  Charles  TJ  TT   had  never  raised  more  he  feared  to  violate  hi?  oath.     The  con- 


104  CHARLES  VIII.  Chap.  T.  Part  1) 

up  treasures  of  this  sort,  and  even  procured  a  Calabrian  her- 
mit, of  noted  sanctity,  to  journey  a-  far  as  Tours  in  order  to 
restore  his  health.  Philip  de  Comines,  who  attended  him 
during  his  infirmity,  draws  a  parallel  between  the  torments  he 
then  endured  and  those  he  had  formerly  inflicted  on  others. 
Indeed  the  whole  of  his  life  was  vexation  of  spirit.  "  I  have 
known  him,"  says  Comines,  "and  been  his  servant  in  the 
flower  of  his  age,  and  in  the  time  of  his  greatest  prosperity ; 
but  never  did  I  see  him  without  uneasiness  and  care.  Of  all 
amusements  he  loved  only  the  chase,  and  hawking  in  its 
6eason.  And  in  this  he  had  almost  as  much  uneasiness  as 
pleasure :  for  he  rode  hard  and  got  up  early,  and  sometimes 
went  a  great  way,  and  regarded  no  weather  ;  so  that  he  used 
to  return  very  weary,  and  almost  ever  in  wrath  with  some 
one.  I  think  that  from  his  childhood  he  never  had  any 
respite  of  labor  and  trouble  to  his  death.  And  I  am  certain 
that,  if  all  the  happy  days  of  his  life,  in  which  he  had  more 
enjoyment  than  uneasiness,  were  numbered,  they  would  be 
found  very  few  ;  and  at  least  that  they  would  be  twenty  of 
sorrow  for  every  one  of  pleasure."  x 

Charles  VIII.  was  about  thirteen  years  old  when  he  suc- 
chariesvni.  ceeded  his  father  Louis.  Though  the  law  of 
a.d.  1483.  France  fixed  the  majority  of  her  kings  at  that 
age,  yet  it  seems  not  to  have  been  strictly  regarded  on 
this  occasion,  and  at  least  Charles  was  a  minor  by  nature, 
if  not  by  law.  A  contest  arose,  therefore,  for  the  regency, 
which  Louis  had  intrusted  to  his  daughter  Anne,  wife  of  the 
lord  de  Beaujeu,  one  of  the  Bourbon  family.  The  duke  of 
Orleans,  afterwards  Louis  XII.,  claimed  it  as  presumptive 
heir  of  the  crown,  and  was  seconded  by  most  of  the  princes. 
Anne,  however,  maintained  her  ground,  and  ruled  France  for 
several  years  in  her  brother's  name  with  singular  spirit  and 
address,  in  spite  of  the  rebellions  which  the  Orleans  party 
raised  up  against  her.  These  were  supported  by  the  duke 
of  Britany,  the  last  of  the  great  vassals  of  the  crown,  whose 
daughter,  as  he  had  no  male  issue,  was  the  object  of  as  many 
suitors  as  Mary  of  Burgundy. 

stable  of  Si.   Pol,  whom  Louis  invited  he  had   a  similar   respect  for  a  leaden 

with  many  assurances  to  court.bethought  image  of  the  Virgin,  which  he  wore  in  hil 

himself  of  requiring  this  oath  before  he  hat;  as  alluded  to  by  Pope: 

trusted  his  promise-;,  which  the  king  re-  "  A  perjured   prince  a  leaden  saint  r« 

Fased;  and  St.  Pol  prudently  stayed  away.  vere." 

Garn.  t.  xviii.  p.  72.     Some  report  that  i  Comines,  1.  yi  o   13 


France.  AFFAIRS   OF  BRITANY.  10d 

The  duchy  of  Britany  was  peculiarly  circumstance!.  The 
inhabitants,  whether  sprung  from  the  ancient  re-  Affairs , >f 
publicans  of  Armorica,  or,  as  some  have  thought,  Britany. 
from  an  emigration  of  Britons  during  the  Saxon  invasion,  had 
not  originally  belonged  to  the  body  of  the  French  monarchy. 
They  were  governed  by  their  own  princes  and  laws,  though 
tributary,  perhaps,  as  the  weaker  to  the  stronger,  to  the  Me- 
rovingian kings.1  In  the  ninth  century  the  dukes  of  Britany 
did  homage  to  Charles  the  Bald,  the  right  of  which  was 
transferred  afterwards  to  the  dukes  of  Normandy.  Tins 
formality,  at  that  time  no  token  of  real  subjection,  led  to  con- 
sequences beyond  the  views  of  either  party.  For  when  the 
feudal  chains  that  had  hung  so  loosely  upon  the  shoulders  of 
the  great  vassals  began  to  be  straightened  by  the  dexterity 
of  the  court,  Britany  found  itself  drawn  among  the  rest  to  the 
same  centre.  The  old  privileges  of  independence  were 
treated  as  usurpation  ;  the  dukes  were  menaced  with  confisca- 
tion of  their  fief,  their  right  of  coining  money  disputed,  their 
jurisdiction  impaired  by  appeals  to  the  parliament  of  Paris 
However,  they  stood  boldly  upon  their  right,  and  always 
refused  to  pay  liege-homage,  which  implied  an  obligation  of 
service  to  the  lord,  in  contradistinction  to  simple  homage, 
which  was  a  mere  symbol  of  feudal  dependence.'2 

About  the  time  that  Edward  III.  made  pretension  to  the 
crown  of  France,  a  controversy  somewhat  resembling  it  arose 
in  the  duchy  of  Britany,  between  the  families  of  Blois  and 
Montfort.  This  led  to  a  long  and  obstinate  war,  connected 
all  along,  as  a  sort  of  underplot,  with  the  great  drama  of 
France  and  England.  At  last  Montfort,  Edward's  ally,  by 
the  defeat  and  death  of  his  antagonist,  obtained  the  duchy,  of 
which  Charles  V.  soon  after  gave  him  the  investiture.  This 
prince  and  his  family  were  generally  inclined  to  English  con- 

*  Gregory    of    Tours    says    that    the  scriptum    est.      Epist.   c.   8.     See,   too, 

Bretons  were  subject  to  France  from  the  Capitularia  Car.  Calvi,  a.d.  877,  tit.  23. 

death  of  Clovis,  and   that   their  chiefs  At  this   time  a  certain    Noinenoe    had 

were  styled  counts,  not  kings,  1.  iv.  c.  4.  assumed  the  crown  of  Britany.  and  some 

Charlemagne  subdued  the  whole  of  Bri-  others  in  succession  bore   the  name  of 

tany.     Yet  it  seems  clear  from  Nigellus,  king.     They  seem,  however,  to  have  been 

author  of  a  metrical  Life  of  Louis  the  feudally  subject  to  France.     Charles  the 

Debonair,  that  they  were  again  almost  Simple  ceded  to  the  Normans  whatever 

independent.     There  was  even  a  march  right  he  possessed  over  Britany  ;  and  the 

of  the   Britannic   frontier,  which   sepa-  dukes  of  that  country  (the  name  of  king 

rated  it  from  France.     In    the  ensuing  was  now  dropped)  always  did  homage  U 

reign  of  Charles  the  Bald,  Uincmar  tells  Normaudy.    See  Daru,  Hist,  de  Bretagne 

us,  regnum  undique  a  Paganis,  ut  falsis  -  Villaret,  t.  xii.  p.  82;  t    xv.  p.  10P 
Christianis,   scilicet  Britonibus  circum- 


106  MARRIAGE  OF   CHARLES  VIII.    Chap   ,.  Taut  II 

nections ;  but  the  Bretons  would  seldom  permit  them  to  be 
effectual.  Two  cardinal  feelings  guided  the  conduct  of  this 
brave  and  faithful  people;  the  one,  an  attachment  to  the 
French  nation  and  monarchy  in  opposition  to  foreign  enemies  ; 
the  other,  a  zeal  for  their  own  privileges,  and  the  family  of 
Mont  fort,  in  opposition  to  the  encroachments  of  the  crown. 
In  Francis  II.,  the  present  duke,  the  male  line  of  that  family 
was  about  to  be  extinguished.  His  daughter  Anne  was 
naturally  the  object  of  many  suitors,  among  whom  were  par- 
ticularly distinguished  the  duke  of  Orleans,  who  seems  to 
have  been  preferred  by  herself;  the  lord  of  Albret,  a  member 
of  the  Gascon  family  of  Foix,  favored  by  the  Breton  nobility, 
as  most  likely  to  preserve  the  peace  and  liberties  of  their 
country,  but  whose  age  rendered  him  not  very  acceptable  to 
a  youthful  princess ;  and  Maximilian,  king  of  the  Romans. 
Britany  was  rent  by  factions  and  overrun  by  the  armies  of  the 
regent  of  France,  who  did  not  lose  this  opportunity  of  inter- 
fering with  its  domestic  troubles,  and  of  persecuting  her  private 
enemy,  the  duke  of  Orleans.  Anne  of  Britany,  upon  her 
father's  death,  finding  no  other  means  of  escaping 
the  addresses  of  Albret,  was  married  by  proxy  to 
Maximilian.  This,  however,  aggravated  the  evils  of  the 
country,  since  France  was  resolved  at  all  events  to  break  off  so 
dangerous  a  connection.  And  as  Maximilian  himself  was 
unable,  or  took  not  sufficient  pains,  to  relieve  his  betrothed 
„  .  ,  wife  from  her  embarrassments,  she  was  ultimatelv 
Charles' viii.  compelled  to  accept  the  hand  of  Charles  VIII.1 
SBriSy683  He  had  long  been  engaged  by  the  treaty  of  Arras 
to  marry  the  daughter  of  Maximilian,  and  that 
princess  was  educated  at  the  French  court.  But  this  engage- 
ment had  not  prevented  several  years  of  hostilities,  and  con- 
tinual intrigues  with  the  towns  of  Flanders  against  Maxi- 
milian.  The  double  injury  which  the  latter  sustained  in  the 
marriage  of  Charles  with  the  heiress  of  Britany  seemed 
likely  to  excite  a  protracted  contest ;  but  the  king  of  France, 
who  had  other  objects  in  view,  and  perhaps  was  conscious 
that  he  had  not  acted  a  fair  part,  soon  came  to  an  accommo- 
dation, by  which    he    restored   Artois   and    Franche-oomte. 

1  This  is  one  of  the  coolest  violations  without   papa]   dispensation.     This   was 

of   ecclesiastical    law    in    comparatively  obtained;  but  it  bears  date  eight  day* 

modern  times.    Both  contracts,  especially  after  the  ceremony  between  Charles  and 

that  of  Anne,  were  obligatory,  so  far  at  Aune.     (Sismondi,  xv.  106  ) 
l^ast   that   they   could    not  be  dissolved 


Feance. 


THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY. 


107 


Both  these  provinces  had  revolted  to  Maximilian  ;  so  that 
Charles  must  have  continued  the  war  at  some  disadvantage.1 
France  was  now  consolidated  into  a  great  kingdom  :  the 
feudal  system  was  at  an  end.    The  vigor  of  Philjp  AD  1492 
Augustus,  the  paternal  wisdom  of  St.  Louis,  the 
policy  of  Philip  the  Fair,  had  laid  the  foundations  of  a  power- 
ful monarchy,  which  neither  the  arms  of  England,  nor  sedi- 
tions of  Paris,  nor  rebellions   of  the  princes,  were  able  to 
shake.     Besides  the  original  fiefs  of  the  French  crown,  it  had 
acquired  two  countries  beyond   the   Rhone,  which   properly 
depended  only  upon  the  empire,  Dauphine,  under  Philip  of 
Valois,  by  the  bequest  of  Humbert,  the  last  of  its        14gl 
princes  ;  and  Provence,  under  Louis  XL,  by  that 
of  Charles  of  Anjou.2     Thus  having  conquered  herself,   if 
I    may   use    the    phrase,    and    no    longer   apprehensive    of 
any  foreign  enemy,1  France  was  prepared,  under  a  monarch 
flushed  with  sanguine  ambition,  to  carry  her  arms  into  other 


i  Sismoodi,  xv.  135. 

2  The  country  now  called  Dauphine 
lornied  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Aries  or 
Provence,  bequeathed  by  Rodolph  III.  to 
the  emperor  Conrad  II.  But  the  dominion 
of  the  empire  over  these  new  acquisitions 
being  little  more  than  nominal,  a  few  of 
the  chief  nobility  converted  their  respec- 
tive fiefs  into  independent  principalities. 
One  of  these  was  the  lord  or  dauphin  of 
Vienne.  whose  family  became  ultimately 
masters  of  the  whole  province.  Hum- 
bert, the  last  of  these,  made  John,  son 
of  Philip  of  Valois,  his  heir,  on  condition 
that  Dauphine  should  be  constantly  pre- 
served as  a  separate  possession,  not  in- 
corporated with  the  kingdom  of  Frauce. 
This  bequest  was  confirmed  by  the  em- 
peror Charles  IV.,  whose  supremacy  over 
the  province  was  thus  recognized  by  the 
kings  of  France,  though  it  soon  came  to 
be  altogether  disregarded.  Sismoudi  (xiv. 
3)  dates  the  reunion  of  Dauphine  to  the 
crown  from  1457,  before  which  time  it 
was  governed  by  the  dauphin  for  the 
time  being  as  a  foreign  sovereignty. 

Provence,  like  Dauphine,  was  changed 
from  a  feudal  dependency  to  a  sover- 
eignty, in  the  weakness  and  dissolution 
of  the  kingdom  of  Aries,  about  the  early 
part  of  the  eleventh  century.  By  the 
marriage  of  Douce,  heiress  of  the  first  line 
*f  sovereign  counts,  with  Raymond  Be- 


renger,  count  of  Barcelona,  in  1112.  it 
pastel  into  that  distinguished  family. 
In  1167  it  was  occupied  or  usurped  by 
Alfonso  II.,  king  of  Aragou,  a  relation, 
but  not  heir,  of  the  house  of  Berenger. 
Alfonso  bequeathed  Provence  to  his 
second  son,  of  the  same  name,  from  whom 
it  descended  to  Raymond  Berenger  IV. 
This  count  dying  without  male  issue  in 
1245,  his  youngest  daughter  Beatrice 
took  possession  by  virtue  of  her  father's 
testament.  But  this  succession  being  dis- 
puted by  other  claimants,  and  especially 
by  Louis  IX.,  who  had  married  her  eldest 
sister,  she  compromised  differences  by 
marrying  Charles  of  Anjou,  the  king's 
brother.  The  family  of  Anjou  reigned  in 
Provence,  as  well  as  in  Naples,  till  the 
death  of  Joan  in  1382,  who,  having  no 
children,  adopted  Louis  duke  of  Anjou, 
brother  of  Charles  V.,  as  her  successor. 
This  second  Angeviue  line  ended  in  1481 
by  the  death  of  Charles  III. ;  though 
Regnier,  duke  of  Lorraine,  who  was  de- 
scended through  a  female,  had  a  claim 
which  it  does  not  seem  easy  to  repel  by 
argument.  It  was  very  easy,  however, 
for  Louis  XI.,  to  whom  Charles  III.  had 
bequeathed  his  rights,  to  repel  it  by 
force,  and  accordingly  he  took  possession 
of  Provence,  which  was  permanently 
united  to  the  Crown  by  letters  patent  ot 
Charles  VIII.  in  I486.* 


Art  de  verifier  les  Dates,  t.  ii.  p.  445.  —  Garnier,  t.  xix.  p.  57,  474- 


108       AUTHORITIES  FOR  FRENCH  HISTORY.  Chap.  I.  Part  II 

countries,  ami  to  contest  the  prize  of  glory  and  power  upon 
(he  ample  theatre  of  Europe.1 


1  The  principal  authority,  exclusive  of 
original  writers,  on  which  I  have  relied 
for  this  chapter,  is  the  History  of  France 
by  Velly,  Villaret.  and  Gamier ;  a  work 
which,  notwithstanding  several  defects, 
has  absolutely  superseded  those  of  Meze- 
ray  and  Daniel.  The  part  of  the  Abbe 
Velly  comes  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
eighth  volume  (12un>.  edition),  and  of  the 
reign  of  Philip  de  Valois.  His  continu- 
ator,  Villaret.  was  interrupted  by  death 
in  the  seventeenth  volume,  and  in  the 
reign  of  Louis  XI.  In  my  references  to 
this  history,  which  for  common  facts  I 
have  not  thought  it  necessary  to  make,  I 
have  merely  named  the  author  of  the 
particular  volume  which  I  quote.  This 
has  made  the  above  explanation  con- 
venient, as  the  reader  might  imagine 
that  I  referred  to  three  distinct  works. 
Of  these  three  historians.  Gamier,  the 
last,  is  the  most  judicious,  and.  1  believe, 
the  most  accurate.  His  prolixity,  though 
a  material  defect,  and  one  which  has  oc- 
casioned the  work  itself  to  become  an 
immeasurable  undertaking,  which  could 
never  be  completed  on  the  same  scale,  is 
chiefly  occasioned  by  too  great  a  regard 
to  details,  and  is  more  tolerable  than  a 
similar  fault  in  Villaret,  proceeding  from 
a  love  of  idle  declamation  and  sentiment. 
Villaret,  however,  is  not  without  merits. 
He  embraces,  perhaps  more  fully  than 
his  predecessor  Velly,  those  collateral 
branches  of  history  which  an  enlightened 
reader  requires  almost  in  preference  to 
sivil  transactions,  the  laws,  manners,  lit- 


erature, and  in  general  the  whole  domes- 
tic records  of  a  nation.  These  subjects 
are  not  always  well  treated;  but  the 
book  itself,  to  which  there  is  a  remark- 
ably full  index,  forms,  upon  the  whole,  a 
great  repository  of  useful  knowledge. 
Villaret  had  the  advantage  of  official 
access  to  the  French  archives,  bj  which 
he  has  no  doubt  enriched  his  history; 
but  his  references  are  indistinct,  and  his 
composition  breathes  an  air  of  rapidity 
and  want  of  exactness.  Velly's  charac- 
teristics are  not  very  dissimilar.  The 
style  of  both  is  exceedingly  bad,  as  has 
been  severely  noticed,  along  with  their 
other  defects,  by  Gaillard,  in  Observa- 
tions sur  l'Histoire  de  Velly,  Villaret,  et 
Garnier.     (4  vols.  12mo.  Paris,  1806.) 

[This  history  is  now  but  slightly  es- 
teemed in  France,  especially  the  volumes 
written  by  the  Abbe  Velly.  The  writers 
were  too  much  imbued  with  the  spirit  of 
the  old  monarchy  (though  no  adulators 
of  kings,  and  rather  liberal  according  to 
the  staudard  of  their  own  age)  for  those 
who  have  taken  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people  for  their  creed  Nor  are  they 
critical  and  exact  enough  for  the  present 
state  of  historical  knowledge.  Sismondi 
aud  Michelet,  especially  the  former,  are 
doubtless  superior;  but  the  reader  will 
not  find  in  the  latter  as  regular  a  narra- 
tion of  facts  as  in  Velly  and  Villaret. 
Sismondi  has  as  many  prejudice*  on 
one  side  as  thty  have  on  the  opp<Bita 
[1848]  J. 


Notes  to  Chap.  1.  ANCIENT   GAUL  10(J 


NOTES   TO   CHAPTER  I. 


Note  I.     Page  16. 

The  evidence  of  Zosimus,  which  is  the  basis  of  this  theory 
of  Dubos,  cannot  be  called  very  slight.  Early  in  the  fifth 
century,  according  to  him,  about  the  time  when  Constantine 
usurped  the  throne  of  Britain  and  Gaul,  or,  as  the  sense 
shows,  a  little  later,  in  consequence  of  the  incursions  of  the 
barbarians  from  beyonpl  the  Rhine,  the  natives  of  Britain, 
taking  up  arms  for  themselves,  rescued  their  cities  from  these 
barbarians  ;  and  the  whole  Armorican  territory,  and  other 
provinces  of  Gaul,  6  'Apfxopixog  aitag,  ml  erepaL  Yakaruv  eirapxlai, 
in  imitation  of  the  Britons,  liberated  themselves  in  the  same 
manner,  expelling  the  Roman  rulers,  and  establishing  an 
internal  government  :  knft&TJiovGaL  p.lv  tovc  'Puifiaiovg  apxovTag, 
ointiov  61  kclt'  k^ovaiav  TToXlrevfia  KadicTaoai.  Lib.  vi.  c.  5.  Guizot 
gives  so  much  authority  to  this  as  to  say  of  the  Armoricans, 
u  lis  se  maintinrent  toujours  libres,  entre  les  barbares  et  les 
Romaius."  Introduction  a  la  Collection  des  Memoires,  vol.  i. 
p.  33 G.  Sismondi  pays  little  regard  to  it.  The  proofs 
alleged  by  Daru  for  the  existence  of  a  king  of  Britany 
named  Conan,  early  in  the  fifth  century,  would  throw  much 
doubt  on  the  Armorican  republic  ;  but  they  seem  to  me 
rather  weak.  Britany,  it  may  be  observed  by  the  way,  was 
never  subject  to  the  Merovingian  kings,  except  sometimes  in 
name.  Dubos  does  not  think  it  probable  that  there  was  anr 
central  authority  in  what  he  calls  the  Armorican  confederacy, 
but  conceives  the  cities  to  have  acted  as  independent  states 
during  the  greater  part  of  the  fifth  century.  (Hist,  de 
l'Etablissement,  &c,  vol.  i.  p.  338.)  He  gives,  however,  an 
enormous  extent  to  Armorica,  supposing  it  to  have  comprised 
Aquitaine.  But,  though  the  contrary  has  been  proved,  it  is 
to  be  observed  that  Zosimus  mentions  other  provinces  of 
Gaul,  Irepcu  yalaruv  kirapxlat,  as  well  as  Armorica.      Procopiu? 


110  THE  FRANKS.  Norus  ro 

by  the  word  '  A.pi36pvxoi,  seems  to  indicate  all  the  inhabitants 
at  least  of  Northern  Gaul ;  but  the  passage  is  so  ambiguous, 
and  his  acquaintance  with  that  history  so  questionable,  that 
little  can  be  inferred  from  it  with  any  confidence.  On  the 
whole,  the  history  of  Northern  Gaul  in  the  fifth  century 
is  extremely  obscure,  and  the  trustworthy  evidence  very 
scanty. 

Sismondi  (Hist,  des  Francais,  vol.  i.  p.  134)  has  a  good 
passage,  which  it  will  be  desirable  to  keep  in  mind  when  we 
launch  into  mediaeval  antiquities  :  — "  Ce  peu  des  mots  a 
donne  matiere  a  d'amples  commentaires,  et  au  developpement 
de  beaucoup  de  conjectures  ingenieuses.  L'abbe  Dubos,  en 
expliquant  le  silence  des  historiens,  a  fonde  sur  des  sousenten- 
dus  une  histoire  assez  complete  de  la  republique  Armorique. 
Nous  serons  souvent  appeles  a  nous  tenir  en  garde  contre 
le  zele  des  ecrivains  qui  ne  satisfait  point  l'aridite  de  nos 
chroniques,  et  qui  y  suppleent  par. des  divinations.  Plus 
d'une  fois  le  lecteur  pourra  etre  surpris  en  voyant  a  combien 
peu  se  reduit  ce  que  nous  savons  reellement  sur  un  eVene- 
ment  assez  celebre  pour  avoir  motive  de  gros  livres." 

Note  II.     Page  16. 

The  Franks  are  not  among  the  German  tribes  mentioned 
by  Tacitus,  nor  do  they  appear  in  history  before  the  year  240. 
Guizot  accedes  to  the  opinion  that  they  were  a  confederation 
of  the  tribes  situated  between  the  Rhine,  the  Weser,  and  the 
Main ;  as  the  Alemanni  were  a  similar  league  to  the  south 
of  the  last  river.1  Their  origin  may  be  derived  from  the 
necessity  of  defending  their  independence  against  Rome ;  but 
they  had  become  the  aggressors  in  the  period  when  we  read 
of  them  in  Roman  history ;  and,  like  other  barbarians  in  that 
age,  were  often  the  purchased  allies  of  the  declining  empire. 
Their  history  is  briefly  sketched  by  Guizot  (Essais  sur 
I'Histoire  de  France,  p.  53),  and  more  copiously  by  other 
antiquarians,  among  whom  M.  Lehuerou,  the  latest,  and  not 
the  least  original  or  ingenious,  conceives  them  to  have  been  a 
race  of  exiles  or  outlaws  from  other  German  tribes,  taking 
the  name  Franc  from  frech,  fierce  or  bold,2  and  settling  at 

i  Alemanni  is  generally  supposed   to  moires  de  l'Acadeinie  de  Bruxelles,  vol. 

mean  "all  men.' ?    Meyer,  however,  takes  iii.  p.  439. 

It  for  another  form  of  Arimauni,   from  2  This   etymology   had   been   given   bj 

Heermauuer,  soldiers.  —  Nouveaux  Me-  Thierry,  or  was  of  :lder  origin 


Uhap.  I.  THE  FRANKS.  Ill 

first,  by  necessity,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Elbe,  whence  they 
moved  onwards  to  seek  better  habitations  at  the  expense 
of  less  intrepid,  though  more  civilized  nations.  "  Et  ainsi 
naquit  la  premiere  nation  de  FEurope  moderne."  *  Institutions 
Merovingiennes,  vol.  i.  p.  91. 

An  earlier  writer  considers  the  Franks  as  a  brand  1  of  the 
great  stock  of  the  Suevi,  mentioned  by  Tacitus,  who,  he  tells 
us,  "  majorem  Germanire  partem  obtinent,  propriis  adhuc 
nationibus  nominibusque  discreti,  quanquam  in  communi 
Suevi  dicuntur.  Insigne  gentis  obliquare  crinem,  nodoque 
substringere."  De  Moribus  German,  c.  38.  Ammianus 
mentions  the  Salian  Franks  by  name :  "  Francos  eos  quos 
consuetudo  Salios  appellavit."  See  a  memoir  in  the  Trans 
actions  of  the  Academy  of  Brussels,  1824,  by  M.  Devez, 
"  sur  l'etablissement  des  Francs  dans  la  Belgique." 

In  the  great  battle  of  Chalons,  the  Franks  fought  on  the 
Roman  side  against  Attila ;  and  we  find  them  mentioned 
several  times  in  the  history  of  Northern  Gaul  from  that  time. 
Lehuerou  (Institutions  Merovingiennes,  c.  11)  endeavors  to 
prove,  as  Dubos  had  done,  that  they  were  settled  in  Gaul, 
far  beyond  Tournay  and  Cambray,  under  Meroveus  and 
Childeric,  though  as  subjects  of  the  empire ;  and  Luden 
conjectures  that  the  wrhole  country  between  the  Moselle  and 
the  Somme  had  fallen  into  their  hands  even  as  early  as  the 
reign  of  Honorius.  (Geschichte  des  Deutschen  Volkes,  vol.  ii. 
p.  881.)  This  is  one  of  the  obscure  and  debated  points  in 
early  French  history.  But  the  seat  of  the  monarchy  appears 
clearly  to  have  been  established  at  Cambray  before  the  middle 
of  the  fifth  century. 

Note  III.     Page  16. 

This  theory,  which  is  partly  countenanced  by  Gibbon,  has 
lately  been  revived,  in  almost  its  fullest  extent,  by  a  learned 
and  spirited  investigator  of  early  history,  Sir  Francis  Pal- 
grave,  in  his  Rise  and  Progress  of  the  English  Commonwealth 
i.  360  ;  and  it  seems  much  in  favor  with  M.  Raynouard,  in 
his  Histoire  du  Droit  Municipal  en  France.  M.  Lehuerou, 
in  a  late  work  (Histoire  des  Institutions  Merovingiennes  et 
Carolingiennes,  2  vols.,  1843),  has  in  a  great  measure  adopted 

l  As  M.  Lehuerou  belongs  to  what  is     quaries,  he  should  not  have  brought  th« 
sailed  the  Roman  school  of  French  anti-    nation  from  beyond  the  Rhine. 


112  THE  FRANKS.  Notes  n. 

it:  —  "  Nous  croyons  devoir  declarer  que,  flans  notre  opinion, 
le  livre  de  Dubos,  malgre*  les  erreurs  trop  replies  qui  le 
deparent,   et   l'esprit  de  systeme  qui  en  a  considerablement 

exagere  les  consequences,  est,  de  tous  ceux  qui  ont  a horde 
le  memo  probleme  an  xviiirae  siecle,  celui  ou  la  question  des 
origines  Merovingiennes  se  trouve  le  plus  pres  de  la  veritable 

solution.  Get  aveu  nous  dispense  de  detailler  plus  longue- 
ment  les  obligations  que  nous  lui  a  von.-.  Elles  se  reveleront 
d'ailleurs  suifisamment  d'elles-memes."  (Introduction,  p.  xi.) 
M.  Leliuerou  does  not,  however,  follow  his  celebrated  guide 
so  far  as  to  overlook  the  necessary  connection  between 
barbarian  force  and  its  aggressive  character.  The  final 
establishment  of  the  Franks  in  Gaul,  according  to  him,  rested 
partly  on  the  concession  and  consent  of  the  emperors,  who 
had  invited  them  to  their  service,  and  rewarded  them,  as  he 
conceives,  with  lands,  while  the  progenitors  of  Clovis  bore  the 
royal  name,  partly  on  their  own  encroachments,  and  especially 
on  the  victory  of  that  prince  over  Syagrius  in  48  G.  (Vol.  i. 
p.  228.) 

It  may  be  alleged  against  Dubos  that  Clovis  advanced  into 
the  heart  of  Gaul  as  an  invader ;  that  he  defeated  in  battle  the 
lieutenant  of  the  emperor,  if  Syagrius  were  such;  or,  if  we 
chose  to  consider  him  as  independent,  which  probably  in 
terms  he  was  not,  that  the  emperors  of  Constantinople  could 
merely  have  relinquished  their  authority,  because  they  had 
not  the  strength  to  enforce  it.  Gaul,  like  Britain,  in  that  age, 
had  become  almost  a  sort  of  derelict  possession,  to  be  seized 
by  the  occupant ;  but  the  title  of  occupancy  is  not  that  of 
succession.  It  may  be  true  that  the  Roman  subjects  of  Clovis 
paid  him  a  ready  allegiance ;.  yet  still  they  had  no  alternative 
but  to  obey. 

Twenty-five  years  elapsed,  during  which  the  kingdom  of 
'he  Salian  Franks  was  prodigiously  aggrandized  by  the  sub- 
mission of  all  Northern  Gaul,  by  the  reduction  of  the  Ale- 
manni  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Rhine,  and  by  the  overthrow 
of  the  Visigoths  at  Vougle,  which  brought  almost  the  whole 
of  the  south  into  subjection  to  Clovis.  It  is  not  disputed  by 
any  one  that  he  reigned  and  conquered  in  his  own  right.  No 
one  has  alleged  that  he  founded  his  great  dominion  on  any 
other  title  than  that  of  the  sword,  which  his  Frank  people 
alone  enabled  him  to  sustain.  But  about  two  years  before 
his  death,  as  Gregory  of  Tours  relates,  the  emperor  Anas- 


ohap.  I.  THE  FRANKS.  113 

tasius  bestowed  upon  him  the  dignity  of  consul ;  and  this  has 
been  eagerly  caught  at  by  the  school  of  Dubos  as  a  fact  of 
high  importance,  and  as  establishing  a  positive  right  of 
sovereignty,  at  least  over  the  Romans,  that  is,  the  provincial 
inhabitants  of  Gaul,  which  descended  to  the  long  line  of  the 
Merovingian  house.  Sir  Francis  Palgrave,  indeed,  more 
strongly  than  Dubos  himself,  seems  to  consider  the  French 
monarchy  as  deriving  its  pedigree  from  Rome  rather  than  the 
Elbe. 

The  first  question  that  must  naturally  arise  is,  as  to  the 
value  assignable  to  the  evidence  of  Gregory  of  Tours  re- 
specting the  gift  of  Anastasius.  Some  might  hesitate,  at 
least,  to  accept  the  story  in  all  its  circumstances.  Gregory  is 
neither  a  contemporary  nor,  in  such  a  point,  an  altogether 
trustworthy  witness.  His  style  is  verbose  and  rhetorical; 
and,  even  in  matters  of  positive  history,  scanty  as  are  our 
means  of  refuting  him,  he  has  sometimes  exposed  his  igno- 
rance, and  more  often  given  a  tone  of  improbability  to  his  nar- 
rative. An  instance  of  the  former  occurs  in  his  third  book, 
respecting  the  death  of  the  widow  of  Theodoric,  contradicted 
by  known  history ;  and  for  the  latter  we  may  refer  to  the 
language  he  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Clotilda,  who  urges  her 
husband  to  the  worship  of  Mars  and  Mercury,  divinities  of 
whom  he  had  never  heard. 

The  main  fact,  however,  that  Anastasius  conferred  the  dig- 
nity of  consul  upon  Clovis,  cannot  be  rejected.  Although  it 
has  been  alleged  that  his  name  does  not  occur  in  the  Consular 
Fasti,  this  seems  of  no  great  importance,  since  the  title  was 
merely  an  honorary  distinction,  not  connecting  him  with  the 
empire  as  its  subject.  Guizot,  indeed,  and  Sismondi  conceive 
that  he  was  only  invested  with  the  consular  robe,  according  to 
what  they  take  to  have  been  the  usage  of  the  Byzantine 
court.  But  Gregory,  by  the  words  codicillos  de  considatu, 
seems  to  imply  a  formal  grant.  Nor  does  the  fact  rest  solely 
on  his  evidence,  though  his  residence  at  Tours  would  put  him 
in  possession  of  the  local  tradition.  Hincmar,  the  famous 
bishop  of  Rheims,  has  left  a  Life  of  St.  Remy,  by  whom 
Clovis  was  baptized ;  and,  though  he  wrote  in  the  ninth 
century,  he  had  seen  extracts  from  a  contemporary  Life  of 
that  saint,  not  then,  he  says,  entirely  extant,  which  Life  ma) 
reasonably  be  thought  to  have  furnished  the  substance  of 
♦he  second  book  of  Gregory's  history.     We  find  in  Hincmai 

VOL,  I. — M.  8 


114  THE   FKANKS.  Notes  to 

the  language  of  Gregory  on  the  consulship  of  Clovis,  with  a 
little  difference  of  expression :  "  Cum  quibus  codicillis  etiain  illi 
Anastasius  coronam  auream  cam  gemmis,  el  tunicam  blateam 
mi<it,  et  ab  «'a  die  consul  et  Augustus  esl  appellatus."  (Bee, 
des  Hist.  vol.  iii.  p.  379.)  Now,  the  words  of  Gregory  are  the 
following: — ki  Igitur  ab  Anastasio  imperatore  codicillos  <le 
consulatu  accepit,  et  in  basilica  beati  Martini  tunica  blatea  in- 
dutus  est  et  clainyde,  imponens  vertici  diadema.  Tunc  a<cen.-o 
equite,  aurum,  argentumque  in  itinere  illo,  quod  inter  portain 
atrii  basilicae  beati  Martini  et  ecclesiam  civitatis  est,  prsesenti- 
bus  populis  raanu  propria  spargens,  voluntate  benignissima 
erogavit,  et  ab  ea  die  tanquam  consul  aut  Augustus  est  voci* 
tatus."  The  minuteness  of  local  description  implies  the  tra- 
dition of  the  city  of  Tours,  which  Gregory  would,  of  course, 
know,  and  renders  all  scepticism  as  to  the  main  story  very 
unreasonable.  Thus,  if  we  suppose  the  Life  of  St.  Remy  to 
have  been  the  original  authority,  Anastasius  will  have  sent  a 
crown  to  Clovis.  And  this  would  explain  the  words  of  Greg- 
ory, "  imponens  vertici  diadema."  Such  an  addition  to  the 
dignity  of  consul  is,  doubtless,  remarkable,  and  might  of  itself 
lead  us  to  infer  that  the  latter  was  not  meant  in  its  usual 
sense.  This  passage  is  in  other  respects  more  precise  than  in 
Gregory;  it  has  not  the  indefinite  and  almost  unintelligible 
words  tanquam  consul,  and  has  et  instead  of  aut  Augusta- ; 
which  latter  conjunction,  however,  in  low  Latin,  is  often  put 
for  the  former. 

But,  though  the  historical  evidence  is  considerably  strength- 
ened by  the  supposition  that  Gregory  copied  a  Life  ot  St. 
Remigius  of  nearly  contemporary  date  with  the  event,  we  do 
not  find  all  our  difficulty  removed  so  as  to  render  it  implicit 
credence  in  every  particular.  That  Clovis  would  be  called 
consul  by  the  provincial  Romans  after  he  had  received  the 
title  from  Anastasius  is  very  natural ;  that  he  was  ever  called, 
even  by  them,  Augustus,  that  is,  Emperor,  except  ptrhaps  in 
a  momentary  acclamation,  we  may  not  unreasonably  scruple 
to  believe.  The  imperial  title  would  hardly  be  assumed  by 
one  who  pretended  only  to  a  local  sovereignty ;  nor  is  such  a 
usurpation  consistent  with  the  theory  that  the  Frank  chieftain 
was  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the  court  of  Constantinople, 
and  in  subordination  to  it.  One  or  other  hypothesis  must  sure- 
ly be  rejected.  It"  Clovis  was  called  emperor  (and  when  did 
Augustus  bear  any  other  meaning?),  he  was  no  vicegerent  of 


Chai    I.  THE  FRANKS.  11* 

Anastasius,  no  consul  of  the  empire.  But  the  most  material 
observation?  that  arise  are,  —  first,  that  the  dignity  of  consul 
was  merely  personal,  and  we  have  not  the  slightest  evidence 
that  any  of  the  posterity  of  Clovis  either  acquired  or  assumed 
it ;  secondly  that  the  Franks  alone  were  the  source  of  power 
to  the  house  of  Meroveus.  "  The  actual  and  legal  authority 
of  Clovis,"  says  Gibbon,  "  could  not  receive  any  new  acces- 
sion from  the  consular  dignity.  It  was  a  name,  a  shadow,  an 
empty  pageant ;  and,  if  the  conqueror  had  been  instructed  to 
claim  the  ancient  prerogatives  of  that  high  office,  they  must 
have  expired  with  the  period  of  its  annual  duration.  But  the 
Romans  were  disposed  to  revere  in  the  person  of  their  master 
that  antique  title  which  the  emperors  condescended  to  as- 
sume ;  the  barbarian  himself  seemed  to  contract  a  sacred 
obligation  to  respect  the  majesty  of  the  republic;  and  the 
successors  of  Theodosius,  by  soliciting  his  friendship,  tacitly 
forgave  and  almost  ratified  the  usurpation  of  Gaul."  (Chap. 
Xxxviii.)  It  does  not  appear  to  me,  therefore,  very  material 
towards  the  understanding  French  history,  what  was  the  in- 
tention of  Anastasius  in  conferring  the  name  of  consul  on  the 
king  of  the  Franks.  It  was  a  token  of  amity,  no  doubt ;  a 
pledge,  perhaps,  that  the  court  of  Constantinople  renounced 
the  hope  of  asserting  its  pretensions  to  govern  a  province  so 
irrecoverably  separated  from  it  as  Gaul;  but  were  it  even 
the  absolute  cession  of  a  right,  which,  by  the  usual  law  of 
nations,  required  something  far  more  explicit,  it  would  not 
affect  in  any  degree  the  real  authority  which  Clovis  had  won 
by  the  sword,  and  had  exercised  for  more  than  twenty  years 
over  the  unresisting  subjects  of  the  Roman  empire. 

A  different  argument  for  the  theory  of  devolution  of  power 
from  the  Byzantine  emperor  on  the  Franks  is  founded  on  the 
cession  of  Justinian  to  Theodebert  king  of  Austrasia,  in  540. 
Provence,  which  continued  in  the  possession  of  the  emperors 
for  some  time  after  the  conquest  of  Gaul  by  Clovis,  had  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  the  Ostrogoths,  then  masters  of  Italy.  The 
alliance  of  the  Frank  king  was  sought  by  both  parties,  at  the 
price  of  what  one  enjoyed  and  the  other  claimed  —  Provence, 
with  its  wealthy  cities  of  Marseilles  and  Aries.  Theodebert 
was  no  very  good  ally,  either  to  the  Greeks  or  the  Goths ; 
but  he  occupied  the  territory,  and  after  a  few  years  it  was 
formally  ceded  to  him  by  Justinian.  "  That  emperor,"  in  the 
words  of  Gibbon,  who  has  not  told  tl  e  history  very  exactly. 


116  THE  FRANKS.  Notes  to 

"generously  yielding  to  the  Franks  the  sovereignty  of  the 
countries  beyond  the  Alps  which  they  already  possessed,  ab- 
solved the  provincials  from  their  allegiance,  and  established, 
on  a  more  lawful,  though  not  more  solid  foundation,  the  throne 
of  the  Merovingians."  Procopius,  in  his  Greek  vanity,  pre- 
tends that  the  Franks  never  thought  themselves  secure  of 
Gaul  until  they  obtained  this  sanction  from  the  emperor. 
"This  strong  declaration  of  Procopius,"  says  Gibbon,  "would 
almost  suffice  to  justify  the  abbe  Dubos."  I  cannot,  however, 
.*ate  the  courage  of  that  people  so  low  as  to  believe  that  they 
feared  the  armies  of  Justinian,  which  they  had  lately  put  to 
flight  in  Italy  ;  nor  do  I  know  that  a  title  of  sixty  years'  pos- 
session gains  much  legality  by  the  cession  of  one  who  had  as- 
serted no  claim  during  that  period.  Constantinople  had 
tacitly  renounced  the  western  provinces  of  Rome  by  her  ina- 
bility to  maintain  them.  I  must,  moreover,  express  some 
doubt  whether  Procopius  ever  meant  to  say  that  Justinian  con- 
lirmed  to  the  Frank  sovereign  his  rights  over  the  whole  of 
Gaul.  He  uses,  indeed,  the  word  TdkTdas  ;  but  that  should,  I 
think,  be  understood  according  ■  to  the  general  sense  of  the 
passage,  which  would  limit  its  meaning  to  Provence,  their 
recent  acquisition,  and  that  which  the  Ostrogoths  had  already 
relinquished  to  them.  Gibbon,  on  the  authority  of  Procopius, 
goes  on  to  say  that  the  gold  coin  of  the  Merovingian  kings, 
"by  a  singular  privilege,  which  was  denied  to  the  Persian 
monarch,  obtained  a  legal  currency  in  the  empire."  But  this 
legal  currency  is  not  distinctly  mentioned  by  Procopius, 
though  he  strangely  asserts  that  it  was  not  lawful,  ob  d£/u<;, 
for  the  king  of  Persia  to  coin  gold  with  his  own  effigy,  as  if 
the  defiig  of  Constantinople  were  regarded  at  Seleucia.  There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  the  Goths,  as  well  as  Franks,  coined 
gold,  which  might  possibly  circulate  in  the  empire,  without 
having,  strictly  speaking,  a  legal  currency.  The  expressions 
of  Agathias,  quoted  above,  that  the  Franks  had  nearly  the 
same  form  of  government,  and  the  same  laws,  as  the  Romans, 
may  be  understood  as  a  mistaken  view  of  what  Procopius 
says  in  a  passage  which  will  be  hereafter  quoted,  and  which 
Agathias,  a  later  writer,  perhaps  has  followed,  that  the  Roman 
inhabitants  of  Gaul  retained  their  institutions  under  the 
Frank- ;  which  was  certainly  true,  though  by  no  means  more 
s*  than  nnd'T  the  Visigoths. 


Chap.  I.  THE  MEROVINGIAN    PERIOD.  117 


Note  IV.     Page  19. 

It  ought,  perhaps,  to  be  observed,  that  no  period  of  ecclesi- 
astical history,  especially  in  France,  has  supplied  more  saints 
to  the  calendar.  It  is  the  golden  age  of  hagiology.  Thirty 
French  bishops,  under  Clovis  and  his  sons  alone,  are  vener- 
ated in  the  Roman  church ;  and  not  less  than  seventy-one 
saints,  during  the  same  short  period,  have  supplied  some  his- 
torical information,  through  their  Lives  in  Acta  Sanctorum. 
"  The  foundation  of  half  the  French  churches,"  says  Sis- 
mondi,  "  dates  from  that  epoch."  (Vol.  i.  p.  308.)  Nor  was 
the  seventh  century  much  less  productive  of  that  harvest. 
Of  the  service  which  the  Lives  of  the  Saints  have  rendered 
to  history,  as  well  as  of  the  incredible  deficiencies  of  its  ordi- 
nary sources,  some  notion  may  be  gained  by  the  strange  fact 
mentioned  in  Sismondi,  that  a  king  of  Austrasia,  Dagobert 
II.,  was  wholly  overlooked  by  historians  ;  and  his  reign,  from 
674  to  678,  only  retrieved  by  some  learned  men  in  the  seven- 
teenth century,  through  the  Life  of  our  Saint  Wilfred,  who 
had  passed  through  France  on  his  way  to  Rome.  (Hist,  des 
Francais,  vol.  ii.  p.  51.)  But  there  is  a  diploma  of  this 
prince  in  Rec.  des  Hist.  vol.  iv.  p.  685. 

Sismondi  is  too  severe  a  censurer  of  the  religious  senti- 
ment which  actuated  the  men  of  this  period.  It  did  not  pre- 
vent crimes,  even  in  those,  frequently,  who  were  penetrated 
by  it.  But  we  cannot  impute  to  the  ascetic  superstition  of 
the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries,  as  we  may  to  the  persecuting 
spirit  of  later  ages,  that  it  occasioned  them  —  crimes,  at  least, 
which  stand  forth  in  history ;  for  to  fraud  and  falsehood  it,  no 
question,  lent  its  aid.  The  Lives  of  the  Saints,  amidst  all  the 
mass  of  falsehood  and  superstition  which  incrusts  them,  bear 
witness  not  only  to  an  intense  piety,  which  no  one  will  dis- 
pute, but  to  much  of  charity  and  mercy  toward  man.  But, 
even  if  we  should  often  doubt  particular  facts  from  slender- 
ness  of  proof,  they  are  at  least  such  as  the  compilers  of  these 
legends  thought  praiseworthy,  and  such  as  the  readers  of  them 
would  be  encouraged  to  imitate.1 

1  M.  Ampere  has  well  observed  that  it  of  Providence  supporting  the  faithful  in 

was  not  the  mere  interest  of  the  story,  those  troublous  times,  and  of  saints  al- 

nor  even  the  ideal  morality,  which  con-  ways  interfering  in  favor  of  the  inno- 

stituted  the  principal  charm  of  the  le-  cent.  —  Hist.  Litt.  de  la  France  avant  1* 

gends  of  saints  ;  it  was  the  constant  idc<a  12mo  siecle,  ii.  360- 


118  THE  MEROVINGIAN   PERIOD.  Notes  to 

St.  Bathilda,  of  Anglo-Saxon  birth,  queen  of  Clovis  II., 
redeeming  her  countrymen  from  servitude,  to  which  the  bar- 
barous manners  of  their  own  people  frequently  exposed  them, 
is  in  some  measure  a  set-off  against  the  tyrant  princes  of  the 
family  into  which  she  had  come.  And  many  other  instances 
of  similar  virtue  are  attested  with  reasonable  probability. 
Sismondi  never  fully  learned  to  judge  men  accoiding  to.  a 
subjective  standard,  that  is,  their  own  notions  of  right  and 
wrong  ;  or  even  to  perceive  the  immediate  good  consequences 
of  many  principles,  as  well  as  social  institutions  connected 
with  them,  which  we  would  no  more  willingly  tolerate  at 
present  than  himself.  In  this  respect  Guizot  has  displayed  a 
more  philosophical  temper.  Still  there  may  be  some  caution 
necessary  not  to  carry  this  subjective  estimate  of  human 
actions  too  far,  lest  we  lose  sight  of  their  intrinsic  quality. 

We  have,  unfortunately,  to  set  against  the  saintly  legends 
an  enormous  mass  of  better-attested  crimes,  especially  of  op- 
pression and  cruelty.  Perhaps  there  is  hardly  any  history 
extending  over  a  century  which  records  so  much  of  this  with 
so  little  information  of  any  virtue,  any  public  spirit,  any  wis- 
dom, as  the  ten  books  of  Gregory  of  Tours.  The  seventh 
century  has  no  historian  equally  circumstantial;  but  the  tale 
of  the  seventh  century  is  in  substance  the  same.  The  Ro 
man  fraud  and  perfidy  mingled,  in  baleful  confluence,  with 
the  ferocity  and  violence  of  the  Frank. 

"  Those  wild  men's  vices  they  receiv'd, 
And  gave  them  back  their  own." 

It  the  church  was  deeply  tainted  with  both  these  classes  ol 
crime,  it  was  at  least  less  so,  especially  with  the  latter,  than 
the  rest  of  the  nation.  A  saint  might  have  many  faults ;  but 
•t  is  strongly  to  be  presumed  that  mankind  did  not  canonize 
,uch  monsters  as  the  kings  and  nobles  of  whom  we  read 
almost  exclusively  in  Gregory  of  Tours.  A  late  writer,  actu- 
ated by  the  hatred  of  antiquity,  and  especially  of  kings, 
nobles,  and  priests,  which  is  too  much  the  popular  creed  of 
France,  has  collected  from  age  to  age  every  testimony  to  the 
wickedness  of  the  powerful.  His  proofs  are  one-sided,  and, 
consequently,  there  is  some  unfairness  in  the  conclusions ;  but 
the  facts  are,  for  the  most  part,  irresistibly  true.  (Dulaure, 
Hist,  de  Paris,  passim. 


Chap    I.  MAYORS   OF  THE  PALACE.  119 


Note  V.     Page  20. 

The  Mayor  of  the  Palace  appears  as  the  first  officer  of  the 
crown  in  the  three  Frank  kingdoms  during  the  latter  half  of 
the  sixth  century.  He  had  the  command,  as  Guizot  sup- 
poses, of  the  Antrustions,  or  vassals  of  the  king.  Even  after- 
wards the  office  was  not,  as  this  writer  believes,  properly 
elective,  though  in  the  case  of  a  minority  of  the  king,  or 
upon  other  special  occasions,  the  leudes,  or  nobles,  chose  a 
mayor.  The  first  instance  we  find  of  such  an  election  was 
in  575,  when,  after  the  murder  of  Sigebert  by  Fredegonde, 
his  son  Childebert  being  an  infant,  the  Austrasian  leudes  chose 
Gogon  for  their  mayor.  There  seem,  however,  so  many  in- 
stances of  elective  mayors  in  the  seventh  century,  that,  al- 
though the  royal  consent  may  probably  have  been  legally 
requisite,  it  is  hard  to  doubt  that  the  office  had  fallen  into  the 
hands  of  the  nobles.  Thus,  in  641 :  —  "  Flaochatus,  genere 
Francus,  major-domus  in  regnum  Burgundiae,  electione  ponti- 
ficum  et  cunctorum  ducum  a  Nantechilde  regina  in  hunc 
gradum  honoris  nobiliter  stabilitur."  (Fredegar.  Chron.  c. 
89.)  And  on  the  election  of  Ebroin  :  — "  Franci  in  incertum 
vacillantes,  accej>to  consilio,  Ebruinum  in  hujus  honoris  curam 
ac  dignitatem  statu unt."  (c.  92.)  On  the  death  of  Ebroin  in 
681,  "  Franci  Warratonem  virum  illustrem  in  locum  ejus  cum 
jussione  regis  majorem-domus  palatio  constituunt."  These 
two  instances  were  in  Neustria ;  the  aristocratic  power  was 
still  greater  in  the  other  parts  of  the  monarchy. 

Sismondi  adopts  a  very  different  theory,  clinging  a  little  too 
much  to  the  democratic  visions  of  Mably.  "  If  we  knew 
better,"  he  says,  "  the  constitution  of  the  monarchy,  perhaps 
we  might  find  that  the  mayor,  like  the  Justiciary  of  Aragon, 
was  the  representative,  not  of  the  great,  but  of  the  freemen, 
and  taken  generally  from  the  second  rank  in  society,  charged 
to  repress  the  excesses  of  the  aristocracy  as  well  as  of  the 
crown."  (Hist,  des  Francais,  vol.  ii.  p.  4.)  Nothing  appears 
to  warrant  this  vague  conjecture,  which  Guizot  wholly  rejects, 
as  he  does  also  the  derivation  of  major-domus  from  mord- 
dohmen,  a  verb  signifying  to  sentence  to  death,  which  Sis- 
mondi brings  forward  to  sustain  his  fanciful  analogy  to  the 
A.ragonese  justiciary. 

The  hypothesis,  indeed,  that  the  mayor  of  the  palace  was 


1  20  MAYORS  OF  THE  PALACE  Notes  *q 

chosen  out  of  the  common  freeholders,  and  not  the  highest 
class,  is  not  only  contrary  to  everything  we  read  of  the  aristo 
cratical  denomination  in  the  Merovingian  kingdoms,  but  to  a 
passage  in  Fredegarius,  to  which  probably  others  might  be 
added.  Protadius,  he  informs  us,  a  mayor  of  Brunehautfs 
choice,  endeavored  to  oppress  all  men  of  high  birth,  that  no 
one  might  be  found  capable  of  holding  the  charge  in  his  room 
(c.  27).  This,  indeed,  was  in  the  sixth  century,  before  any 
sort  of  election  was  known.  But  in  the  seventh  the  power 
of  the  great,  and  not  of  the  people,  meets  us  at  every  turn. 
Mably  himself  would  have  owned  that  his  democracy  had 
then  ceased  to  exercise  any  power. 

The  Austrasian  mayors  of  the  palace  were,  from  the  reign 
of  Clotaire  II., men  of  great  power,  and  taken  from  the  house 
of  Pepin  of  Landen.  They  carried  forward,  ultimately  for 
their  own  aggrandizement,  the  aristocratic  system  which  had 
overturned  Brunehaut.  Ebroin,  on  the  other  hand,  in  Neus- 
tria,  must  be  considered  as  keeping  up  the  struggle  of  the 
royal  authority,  which  he  exercised  in  the  name  of  several 
phantoms  of  kings,  against  the  encroachments  of  the  aristoc- 
racy, though  he  could  not  resist  them  with  final  success. 
Sismondi  (vol.  ii.  p.  64)  fancies  that  Ebroin  was  a  leader  of 
the  freemen  against  the  nobles.  But  he  finds  a  democratic 
party  everywhere ;  and  Guizot  justly  questions  the  conject- 
ure (Collection  des  Memoires,  vol.  ii.  p.  320).  Sismondi,  in 
consequence  of  this  hypothesis,  favors  Ebroin ;  for  whom  it 
may  be  alleged  that  we  have  no  account  of  his  character  but 
from  his  enemies,  chiefly  the  biographer  of  St.  Leger.  M. 
Lehuerou  sums  up  his  history  with  apparent  justice:  — 
"  Ainsi  perit,  apres  une  administration  de  vingt  ans,  un 
homme  remarquable  a  tous  egards,  mais  que  le  triomphe  de 
ses  ennemis  a  failli  desheriter  de  sa  gloire.  Ses  violences 
sont  pen  douteuses,  mais  son  genie  ne  Test  pas  davantage,  et 
rien  ne  prouve  mieux  la  terreur  qu'il  inspirait  aux  Austra- 
siens  que  les  injures  qu'ils  lui  ont  prodiguees."  (Institutions 
Carolingiennes,  p.  281.) 

Note  VI.   Page  20. 

Aribert,  or  rather  Caribert,  brother  of  Dagobert  L,  was 
declared  king  of  Aquitaine  in  628 ;  but  oi  his  death,  in  631, 
it  became  a  duchy  dependent  on  the  monarchy  under  his  two 


Chap.  1.  AQUITAINE.  121 

sons,  with  its  capital  at  Toulouse.  This  dependence,  however, 
appears  to  have  soon  ceased,  in  the  decay  of  the  Merovingian 
line ;  and  for  a  century  afterwards  Aquitaine  can  hardly  be 
considered  as  part  of  either  the  Neustrian  or  Austrasian 
kingdom.  "  I/ancienne  population  Romaine  travaillait  sans 
cesse  a  ressaisir  son  independance.  Les  Francs  avaient 
conquis,  mais  ne  possedaient  vrairnent  pas  ces  contrees.  Des 
que  leurs  grandes  incursions  cessaient,  les  villes  et  les  cam- 
pagnes  se  soulevaient,  et  se  confederaient  pour  secouer  le  joug.r 
(Guizot,  Cours  d'Hist.  Moderne,  ii.  229.)  This  important 
tact,  though  acknowledged  in  passing  by  most  historians,  has 
been  largely  illustrated  in  the  valuable  Histoire  de  la  Gaule 
Meridionale,  by  M.   Fauriel. 

Aquitaine,  in  its  fullest  extent,  extended  from  the  Loire 
beyond  the  Garonne,  with  the  exception  of  Touraine  and  the 
Orleannois.  The  people  of  Aquitaine,  in  this  large  sense 
of  the  word,  were  chiefly  Romans,  with  a  few  Goths.  The 
Franks,  as  a  conquering  nation,  had  scarcely  taken  up  their 
abode  in  those  provinces'.  But  undoubtedly,  the  Merovingian 
kings  possessed  estates  in  the  south  of  France,  which  they 
liberally  bestowed  as  benefices  upon  their  leudes,  so  that  the 
chief  men  were  frequently  of  Frank  origin.  They  threw 
off,  nevertheless,  their  hereditary  attachments,  and  joined 
with  the  mass  of  their  new  countrymen  in  striving  for  the 
independence  of  Aquitaine.  After  the  battle  of  Testry, 
which  subverted  the  Neustrian  monarchy,  Aquitaine,  and 
even  Burgundy,  ceased  for  a  time  to  be  French  ;  under 
Charles  Martel  they  were  styled  the  Roman  countries. 
(Michelet,  ii.  9.) 

Eudon,  by  some  called  Eudes,  grandson  of  Caribert,  a 
prince  of  conspicuous  qualities,  gained  ground  upon  the 
Franks  during  the  whole  period  of  Pepin  Heristal's  power, 
and  united  to  Aquitaine,  not  only  Provence,  but  a  new 
conquest  from  the  independent  natives,  Gascony.  Eudon 
obtained  in  721  a  far  greater  victory  over  the  Saracens  than 
that  of  Charles  Martel  at  Poitiers.  The  slaughter  was 
immense,  and  confessed  by  the  Arabian  writers  ;  it  even 
appears  that  a  funeral  solemnity,  in  commemoration  of  so 
great  a  calamity,  was  observed  in  Spain  for  four  or  five 
centuries  afterwards.  (Fauriel,  iii.  79.)  But  in  its  conse- 
quences it  was  far  less  impoi  tant ;  for  the  Saracens,  some 
years  afterwards,  returned  to  avenge  their  countrymen,  anil 


122  AUSTIUSIA  AND  NEUSTRIA.  Notes  to 

Eudon  had  no  resource  but  in  the.  aid  of  Charles  Martel 
After  the  retreat  of  the  enemy  it  became  the  necessary  price 
of  the  service  rendered  by  the  Frank  chieftain  that  Aquitaine 
acknowledged  his  sovereignty.  This,  however,  was  si  ill  but 
nominal,  till  Pepin  determined  to  assert  it  more  seriously, 
and  after  a  long  war  overcame  the  last  of  the  ducal  line 
sprung  from  Clotaire  II.,  which  had  displayed,  for  almost  a 
century  and  a  half,  an  energy  in  contrast  with  the  imbecility 
of  the  elder  branch.  Even  this,  as  M.  Fauriel  observes, 
was  little  more  than  a  change  in  the  reigning  family  ;  the 
men  of  Aquitaine  never  lost  their  peculiar  nationality  ;  they 
remained  a  separate  people  in  Gaul,  a  people  distinguished 
by  their  character,  and  by  the  part  which  they  were  called 
to  play  in  the  political  revolutions  of  the  age.    (Vol.  iii.  300.) 

Note  VII.     Page  20. 

Pepin  Heristal  was  styled  Duke  of  Austrasia,  but  assumed 
the  mayoralty  of  Neustria  after  his  great  victory  at  Testry 
in  687,  which  humbled  for  a  lon^  time  the  oreat  rival  branch 
of  the  monarchy.  But  he  fixed  his  residence  at  Cologne, 
and  his  family  seldom  kept  their  court  at  Paris.  The  Franks 
under  Pepin,  his  son  and  grandson,  "  seemed  for  a  second 
time,"  says  Sismondi,  "  to  have  conquered  Gaul ;  it  is  a  new 
invasion  of  the  language,  the  military  spirit,  and  the  manners 
of  Germany,  though  only  recorded  by  historians  as  the  vic- 
tory of  the  Austrasians  over  the  Neustrians  in  a  civil  war. 
The  chiefs  of  the  Carlovingian  family  called  themselves,  like 
their  predecessors,  kings  of  the  Franks  :  they  appear  as 
legitimate  successors  of  Clovis  and  his  family ;  yet  all  is 
changed  in  their  spirit  and  their  manners."     (Vol.  ii.  p.  170.) 

This  revival  of  a  truly  German  spirit  in  the  French  mon- 
archy had  not  been  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  historians  of 
the  eighteenth  century.  It  began  with  the  fall  of  Brunehaut, 
which  annihilated  the  scheme,  not  peculiar  to  herself,  but 
carried  on  by  her  with  remarkable  steadiness,  of  establishing 
a  despotism  analogous  to  that  of  the  empire.  The  Roman 
policy  expired  with  her  ;  Clotaire  II.  and  Dagobert  I.  were 
merely  kings  of  barbarians,  exercising  what  authority  they 
might,  but  on  no  settled  scheme  of  absolute  power.  Their 
successors  were  unworthy  to  be  mentioned  ;  though  in 
Neustria,    through    their   mayors   of  the    palace,  the   royal 


Chap.  I.  THE  MEHOVIXGTAN  PERIOD.  123 

authority  may  have  been  apparently  better  maintained  than 
in  the  eastern  portion  of  the  kingdom.  The  kingdoms  of 
Austrasia  and  Neustria  rested  on  different  bases.  In  the 
formet  the  Franks  were  more  numerous,  less  scattered,  and, 
as  far  as  we  can  perceive,  had  a  more  considerable  nobility. 
They  had  received  a  less  tincture  of  Roman  policy.  They 
were  nearer  to  the  mother  country,  which  had  been,  as  the 
earth  to  Antaeus,  the  source  of  perpetually  recruited  vigor. 
Burgundy,  a  member  latterly  of  the  Neustrian  monarchy, 
had  also  a  powerful  aristocracy,  but  not  in  so  great  a  degree, 
probably,  of  Frank,  or  even  barbarian  descent.  The  battle 
of  Testry  was  the  second  epoch,  as  the  fall  of  Brunehaut  had 
been  the  first,  in  the  restoration  of  a  barbaric  supremacy  to 
the  kingdom  of  Clovis ;  and  the  benefices  granted  by  Charles 
Martel  were  the  third.  It  required  the  interference  of  the 
Holy  See,  in  confirming  the  throne  of  the  younger  Pepin, 
and  still  more  the  splendid  qualities  of  Charlemagne,  to  keep 
up,  even  for  a  time,  the  royal  authority  and  the  dominion 
of  law.  It  is  highly  important  to  keep  in  our  minds  this 
distinction  between  Austrasia  and  Neustria,  subsisting  for 
some  ages,  and,  in  fact,  only  replaced,  speaking  without  exact 
geographical  precision,  by  that  of  Germany  and  France. 

Note  VIII.     Page  21. 

The  Merovingian  period  is  so  briefly  touched  in  the  text, 
as  not,  I  fear,  to  be  very  distinctly  apprehended  by  every 
reader.  It  may  assist  the  memory  to  sketch  rather  a  better 
outline,  distributing  the  period  into  the  following  divisions :  — 

I.  The  reign  of  Clovis.  —  The  Frank  monarchy  is  estab- 
lished in  Gaul ;  the  Romans  and  Visigoths  are  subdued ; 
Christianity,  in  its  Catholic  form,  is  as  entirely  recognized  as 
under  the  empire ;  the  Franks  and  Romans,  without  greatly 
intermingling,  preserve  in  the  main  their  separate  institutions. 

II.  The  reigns  of  his  four  sons,  till  the  death  of  Clotaire  I., 
the  survivor,  in  561.  —  A  period  of  great  aggandizement 
to  the  monarchy.  Burgundy  and  Provence  in  Gaul  itself, 
Thuringia,  Suabia,  and  Bavaria  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Rhine,  are  annexed  to  their  dominions  ;  while  every  crime 
disgraces  the  royal  line,  and  in  none  more  than  in  Clotaire  I. 

III.  A  second  partition  among  his  four  sons  ensues :  the 
four  kingdoms  of   Paris.   Soissons,    Orleans,  and  Austrasia 


124  THE  MEROVINGIAN  PERIOD.  Notes  tc 

revive;  but  a  new  partition  of  those  is  required  by  the  re- 
cent conquests,  and  Gontran  of  Orleans,  without  resigning 
that  kingdom,  removes  his  residence  to  Burgundy.  The 
four  kingdoms  are  reduced  to  three  by  the  death  of  Caribert 
of  Paris;  one,  afterwards  very  celebrated  by  the  name  Neus- 
tria,1  between  the  Scheldt  and  the  Loire,  is  formed  under 
Chilperic,  comprehending  those  of  Paris  and  Soissons.  Ca- 
ribert of  Paris  had  taken  Aquitaine,  whicli  at  his  death  was 
divided  among  the  three  survivors  ;  Austrasia  was  the  por- 
tion of  Sigebert.  This  generation  was  fruitful  of  .-till  more 
crimes  than  the  last,  redeemed  by  no  golden  glory  of  con- 
quest. Fredegonde,  the  wife  of  Chilperic,  diffuses  a  baleful 
light  over  this  period.  But  while  she  tyrannizes  with  little 
control  in  the  west  of  France,  her  rival  and  sister  in  crime, 
Brunehaut,  wife  of  Sigebert  and  mother  of  Thierry  II.  his 
successor,  has  to  encounter  a  powerful  opposition  from  the 
Austrasian  aristocracy  ;  and  in  this  part  of  the  monarchy  a 
new  feature  develops  itself;  the  great  proprietors,  or  nobil- 
ity, act  systematically  with  a  view  to  restrain  the  royal  pow- 
er. Brunehaut,  after  many  vicissitudes,  and  after  having 
seen  her  two  sons  on  the  thrones  of  Austrasia  and  Burgun- 
dy, falls  into  the  hands  of  Clotaire  II.,  king  of  the  other 
division,  and  is  sentenced  to  a  cruel  death.  Clotaire  unites 
the  three  Frank  kingdoms. 

IV.  Reigns  of  Clotaire  II.  and  his  son  Dagobert  I.  —  The 
royal  power,  though  shaken  by  the  Austrasian  aristocracy,  is 
still  effective.  Dagobert,  a  prince  who  seems  to  have  rather 
excelled  most  of  his  family,  and  to  whose  munificence  sev- 
eral extant  monuments  of  architecture  and  the  arts  are  refer- 
red, endeavours  to  stem  the  current.  He  was  the  last  of  the 
Merovingians  who  appears  to  have  possessed  any  distinctive 
character ;  the  Insensati  follow.  After  the  reign  of  Dago- 
bert most  of  the  provinces  beyond  the  Loire  fall  off,  as  it 
may  be  said,  from  the  monarchy,  and  hardly  belong  to  it  for 
a  century. 

V.  The  fifth  period  begins  with  the  accession  of  Clovis 
II.,  son  of  Dagobert,  in  Go8,  and  terminates  with  Pepin 
Heristal's  victory  over  the  Neustrians  at  Testry,  in  687.     It 

i  Neustria,  or  Western  France,  is  first  Toms,   nsl  find  by  the  index;    and  M 

mentioned  in  a  diploma  of  Ohildehert,  Lehuerou   Beems  to  think  that  it  was  not 

with  the  date  of  558.     But  the  genuine-  much  used  till  after  the  death  of  Brune- 

ness  of  this  has  heen  denied :  the  word  haut,  in  613. 
never  occurs  in  the  history  of  Gregory  of 


Chat.  I.  SUBJECTION  OF  THE  SAXONS.  125 

is  distinguished  by  the  apparent  equality  of  the  two  remain- 
ing kingdoms,,  Burgundy  having  now  fallen  into  that  of 
Neustria,  and  by  the  degradation  of  the  royal  line,  in  each 
alike,  into  puppets  of  the  mayors  of  the  palace.  It  is,  in 
Austrasia,  the  triumph  of  the  aristocracy,  among  whom  the 
bishops  are  still  more  prominent  than  before.  Ebroin  holds 
the  mayoralty  of  Neustria  with  an  unsteady  command ;  but 
in  Austrasia  the  progenitors  of  Pepin  Heristal  grow  up  for 
two  generations  in  wealth  and  power,  till  he  becomes  the  ac- 
knowledged chief  of  that  part  of  the  kingdom,  bearing  the 
title  of  duke  instead  of  mayor,  and  by  the  battle  of  Testry 
puts  an  end  to  the  independence  of  Neustria. 

VI.  From  this  time  the  family  of  Pepin  is  virtually  sover- 
eign in  France,  though  at  every  vacancy  kings  of  the  royal 
house  are  placed  by  them  on  the  throne.  Charles  Martel, 
indeed,  son  of  Pepin,  is  not  acknowledged,  even  in  Aus- 
trasia, for  a  short  time  after  his  father's  death,  and  Neustria 
attempts  to  regain  her  independence ;  but  he  is  soon  called 
to  power,  defeats,  like  his  father,  the  western  Franks,  and  be- 
comes, in  almost  as  great  a  degree  as  his  grandson,  the  foun- 
der of  a  new  monarchy.  So  completely  is  he  recognized  as 
sovereign,  though  not  with  the  name  of  king,  that  he  divides 
France,  as  an  inheritance,  among  his  three  sons.  But  soon 
one  only,  Pepin  the  Short,  by  fortune  or  desert,  becomes 
possessor  of  this  goodly  bequest.  In  752  the  new  dynasty 
acquires  a  legal  name  by  the  coronation  of  Pepin. 

Note  IX.     Page  24. 

The  true  cause,  M.  Michelet  observes  (Hist,  de  France, 
ii.  39),  of  the  Saxon  wars,  which  had  begun  under  Charles 
Martel,  and  were  in  some  degree  defensive  on  the  part  of 
the  Franks,  was  the  ancient  antipathy  of  race,  enhanced  by 
the  growing  tendency  to  civilized  habits  among  the  latter. 
This,  indeed,  seems  sufficient  to  account  for  the  conflict,  with- 
out any  national  antipathy.  It  was  that  which  makes  the 
Red  Indian  perceive  an  enemy  in  the  Anglo-American,  and 
the  Australian  savage  in  the  Englishman.  The  Saxons,  in 
their  deep  forests  and  scantily  cultivated  plains,  could  not 
bear  fixed  boundaries  of  land.  Their  gau  was  indefinite ; 
the  mansus  was  certain ;  it  annihilated  the  barbarian's  only 
method  of  combining  liberty  with  possession  of  land,  —  the 


L26  SUBJECTION  OF  THE  SAXONS.  Notes  to 

right  of  shifting  his  occupancy.1  It  is  not  probable,  from 
subsequent  events,  that  the  Saxons  held  very  tenaciously  by 
their  religion ;  but  when  Christianity  first  offered  itself,  it 
came  in  the  train  of  a  conqueror.  Nor  could  Christianity, 
according  at  least  to  the  ecclesiastical  system,  be  made  com- 
patible with  such  a  state  of  society  as  the  German  in  that 
age.  Hence  the  Saxons  endeavored  to  burn  the  first 
churches,  thus  drawing  retaliation  on  their  own  idols. 

The  first  apostle-  of  Germany  were  English  ;  and  of  these 
the  most  remarkable  was  St.  Boniface.  But  this  had  been 
in  the  time  of  Charles  Martel  and  Pepin.  The  labors  of 
these  missionaries  were  chiefly  in  Thuringia,  Franeonia,  and 
Bavaria,  and  were  rewarded  with  great  success.  But  we 
may  here  consider  them  only  in  their  results  on  the  Frank 
monarchy.  Those  parts  of  Germany  had  long  been  subject 
to  Austrasia,  but,  except  so  far  as  they  furnished  troops, 
scarcely  formed  an  integrant  portion  of  that  kingdom.  The 
subjection  of  a  heathen  tribe  is  totally  different  from  that  of 
a  Christian  province.  With  the  Church  came  churches,  and 
for  churches  there  must  be  towns,  and  for  towns  a  magistra- 
cy, and  for  magistracy  law  and  the  means  of  enforcing  it. 
How  different  was  the  condition  of  Bavaria  or  Hesse  in  the 
ninth  century  from  that  of  the  same  countries  in  the  sev- 
enth !  Not  outlying  appendages  to  the  Austrasian  monarchy, 
hardly  counted  among  its  subjects,  but  capable  of  stand- 
ing by  themselves,  as  coordinate  members  of  the  empire, 
an  equipoise  to  France  herself,  full  of  populous  towns,  weal- 
thy nobles  and  prelates,  better  organized  and  more  flourish- 
ing states  than  their  neighbors  on  the  left  side  of  the  Rhine. 
Charlemagne  founded  eight  bishoprics  in  Saxony,  and  dis- 
tributed the  country  into  dioceses. 

Note  X.     Page  25. 

The  project  of  substituting  a  Frank  for  a  Byzantine  sov- 
ereign was  by  no  means  new  in  800.  Gregory  II..  by  a  let- 
ter to  Charles  Martel  in  741,  had  offered  to  renounce  his 
allegiance  to  the  empire,  placing  Rome  under  the  protection 
of  the   French  chief,  with  the  title  of  consul   or  senator. 

i  Michelct  refers  to  Grimm,  who  is  ex-     the  age  of  Tacitus  longer  than  German 
cellent  authority.     The  Saxons  are  likely     tribes  on  the  Rhine  and  Main, 
to   have  maintained  the  old  customs  of 


Chap.  1.  CHARLEMAGNE.  127 

The  immediate  government  he  doubtless  meant  to  keep  in 
the  hands  of  the  Holy  See.  He  supplicated,  at  the  same 
time,  for  assistance  against  the  Lombards,  which  was  the 
principal  motive  for  this  offer.  Charles  received  the  pro- 
posal with  pleasure,  but  his  death  ensued  before  he  had  time 
to  take  any  steps  towards  fulfilling  so  glorious  a  destiny. 
When  Charlemagne  acquired  the  rank  of  Patrician  at  Rome 
in  789,  we  may  consider  this  as  a  pail  performance  of  Greg- 
ory II.'s  engagement,  and  the  supreme  authority  was  vir- 
tually in  the  hands  of  the  king  of  the  Franks  ;  but  the 
renunciation  of  allegiance  toward  the  Greek  empire  had  never 
positively  taken  place,  and  there  are  said  to  have  been  some 
tokens  of  recognition  of  its  nominal  sovereignty  almost  to 
the  end  of  the  century. 

It  is  contended  by  Sir  F.  Palgrave  that  Charlemagne  was 
chosen  by  the  Romans  as  lawful  successor  of  Constantine 
V.,  whom  his  mother  Irene  had  dethroned  in  795,  the  usage 
of  the  empire  having  never  admitted  a  female  sovereign. 
And  for  this  he  quotes  two  ancient  chronicles,  one  of  which, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  copied  from  the  other.  It  is 
indeed  true,  which  he  omits  to  mention,  that  Leo  III.  had  a 
singular  scheme  of  a  marriage  between  Charles  and  Irene, 
which  would  for  a  time  have  united  the  empire.  The  pro- 
posal was  actually  made,  but  prudently  rejected  by  the 
Greek  lady. 

It  remains  nevertheless  to  be  shown  by  what  right  Leo 
III.,  cum  omni  Chvistiano  jwpulo,  that  is,  the  priests  and 
populace  of  degenerate  Rome,  could  dispose  of  the  entire 
empire,  or  affect  to  place  a  stranger  on  the  throne  of  Con- 
stantinople ;  for  if  Charles  were  the  successor  of  Constan- 
tine V.,  we  must  draw  this  conclusion.  Rome,  we  should 
keep  in  mind,  was  not  a  jot  more  invested  with  authority 
than  any  other  city ;  the  Greek  capital  had  long  taken  her 
place ;  and  in  every  revolution  of  new  Rome,  the  decrepit 
mother  had  without  hesitation  obeyed.  Nor  does  it  seem  to 
me  exceedingly  material,  if  the  case  be  such,  that  Charle- 
magne was  not  styled  emperor  of  the  West,  or  successor 
of  Augustulus.  It  is  evident  that  his  empire,  relatively  to 
that  of  the  Greeks,  was  western ;  and  we  do  not  find  that 
either  he  or  his  family  ever  claimed  an  exclusive  right  to 
the  imperial  title.  The  pretension  would  have  been  diamet- 
rically opposed  both  to  prescriptive  right  and  actual  posses 


1  -28  CHARLEMAGNE.  Notes  to 

sion.  He  wrote  to  the  emperor  Nicephorus,  successor  of 
[rene,  as  fraternitas  vestra ;  but  it  is  believed  that  the 
Greeks  never  recognized  the  title  of  a  western  barbarian. 
In  a  later  age,  indeed,  some  presumed  to  reckon  the  em- 
peror of  Constantinople  among  kings.  A  writer  of  the  four- 
teenth century  says,  in  French,  —  "Or  devez  savoir  qu'il  ne 
doit  estre  sur  terre  qu*un  seul  empereur,  combien  que  celui 
de  Constantinople  estime  estre  seul  empereur ;  mais  non  est, 
il  n'est  fors  seulement  qu'un  roy."  (Ducange,  voc.  Impera- 
tor,  which  is  worth  consulting.)  The  kings  of  France  and 
Castile,  as  well  as  our  own  Anglo-Saxon  monarchs  in  the 
tenth  century,  and  even  those  of  Bulgaria,  sometimes  as- 
sumed the  imperial  title.  But  the  Anglo-Saxons  preferred 
that  of  Basileus,  which  was  also  a  Byzantine  appellation. 

The  probable  design  of  Charlemagne,  in  accepting  the 
title  of  emperor,  was  not  only  to  extend  his  power  as  far  as 
possible  in  Italy,  but  to  invest  it  with  a  sort  of  sacredness 
and  prescriptive  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  his  barbarian  subjects. 
These  had  been  accustomed  to  hear  of  emperors  as  some- 
thing superior  to  kings ;  they  were  themselves  fond  of  pom- 
pous titles,  and  the  chancery  of  the  new  Augustus  soon 
borrowed  the  splendid  ceremonial  of  the  Byzantine  court. 
His  councillors  approached  him  on  their  knees,  and  kissed 
his  feet.  Yet  it  does  not  appear  from  history  that  his  own 
royal  power,  certainly  very  considerable  before,  was  much 
enhanced  after  it  became  imperial.  He  still  took  the  advice, 
and  legislated  with  the  consent,  of  his  leudes  and  bishops  ; 
in  fact,  he  continued  to  be  a  German,  not  a  Roman,  sover- 
eign. In  the  reign  of  his  family  this  prevalence  of  the 
Teutonic  element  in  the  Carlovingian  polity  became  more 
and  more  evident ;  the  bishops  themselves,  barbarian  in 
origin  and  in  manners,  cannot  be  reckoned  in  the  opposite 
scale. 

This  was  a  second  failure  of  the  attempt,  or  at  least  the 
scheme,  of  governing  barbarians  upon  a  Roman  theory. 
The  first  had  been  tried  by  the  sons  of  Clovis,  and  the  high- 
spirited  Visigoth  Brunehaut.  But  the  associations  of  Roman 
authority  with  the  imperial  name  were  too  striking  to  be  lost 
forever;  they  revived  again  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
centuries  with  the  civil  law,  and  gained  strength  with  the 
Ghibelin  faction  in  Italy.  Even  in  France  and  England,  as 
many  think,  they   were  by  no  means  ineffectual;  though  it 


Chap.  I  HEREDITARY  SUCCESSION.  129 

was  necessary  to  substitute  the  abstract  principle  of  royalty 
for  the  Lex  Regia  of  the  Roman  empire. 

Note  XI.     Page  27. 

A  question  of  the  utmost  importance  had  been  passed 
over  in  the  elevation  of  Charlemagne  to  the  imperial  title, 
It  was  that  of  hereditary  succession.  No  allusion,  as  far  as 
L  have  found,  was  made  to  this  in  the  irregular  act  by  which 
the  pope,  with  what  he  called  the  Roman  people,  transferred 
their  allegiance  from  Constantinople  to  Aix-la-Chapelle.  It 
was  indeed  certain  that  the  empire  had  not  only  passed  for 
hereditary  from  the  time  of  Augustus,  but  ever  since  that  of 
Diocletian  had  been  partible  among  the  imperial  family  at 
the  will  of  the  possessor.  Yet  the  whole  proceeding  was  so 
novel,  and  the  pretensions  of  the  Holy  See  implied  in  it  so 
indefinite,  that  some  might  doubt  whether  Charles  had 
acquired,  along  with  the  rank  of  imperator,  its  ancient  pre- 
rogatives. There  was  also  a  momentous  consideration,  how 
far  his  Frank  subjects,  accustomed  latterly  to  be  consulted  on 
royal  succession,  with  their  rights  of  election,  within  the 
limits  of  the  family,  positively  recognized  at  the  accession  of 
Pepin,  and  liable  to  become  jealous  of  Roman  theories  of 
government,  would  acquiesce  in  a  simple  devolution  of  the 
title  on  the  eldest  born  as  his  legal  birthright.  In  the  first 
prospective  arrangement,  accordingly,  which  Charles  made 
for  the  succession,  that  at  Thionville,  in  806,  a  partition 
among  his  three  sons  was  designed,  with  the  largest  share 
reserved  for  the  eldest.  But  though  Italy,  by  which  he 
meant,  as  he  tells  us,  Lombardy,  was  given  to  one  of  the 
younger,  care  is  taken  by  a  description  of  the  boundaries  to 
exclude  Rome  itself,  as  well  as  the  whole  exarchate  of 
Ravenna,  become,  by  Pepin's  donation,  the  patrimony  of  St. 
Peter ;  nor  is  there  the  least  allusion  to  the  title  of  emperor. 
Are  we  to  believe  that  he  relinquished  the  eternal  city  to  its 
bishop,  though  styling  himself,  in  this  very  instrument, 
Romani  rector  imperii,  and  having  literally  gained  not  an- 
other inch  of  territory  by  that  dignity  ?  It  is  surely  more 
probable  that  he  reserved  the  sovereignty  over  Rome,  to  be 
annexed  to  the  rank  of  emperor  whenever  he  should  obtain 
that  for  his  eldest  son.  And  on  the  death  of  this  son,  and  of 
his  next  brother,  some  years  afterwards,  the  whole  succession 

^OL.  i.  —  m,  9 


130  HEREDITARY   SUCCESSION.  Notes  t* 

devolving  on  Louis  the  Debonair,  Charlemagne  presented 
this  prince  to  the  great  Placitum  of  the  nobles  and  bishops 
at  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  813,  requesting  them  to  name  him  king 
and  emperor.  No  reference  was  made  to  the  pope  for  his 
approbation;  and  thus  the  German  principle  of  sovereignty 
gained  a  decisive  victory  over  the  Roman.  If  some  claim 
of  the  pope  to  intermeddle  with  the  empire  was  intimated  at 
the  coronation  of  Louis  at  Rhcims  by  Stephen  II.  in  816, 
which  docs  not  seem  certain,  it  could  only  have  been  through 
the  pope's  knowledge  of  the  personal  submissiveness  to 
ecclesia-lical  power  which  was  the  misfortune  of  that  prince. 
He  had  certainly  borne  the  imperial  title  from  his  father's 
death. 

In  the  division  projected  by  Louis  in  817,  to  take  place  on 
his  death,  and  approved  by  an  assembly  at  Aix,  a  considera- 
ble supremacy  was  reserved  for  the  future  emperor;  he  was 
constituted,  in  effect,  a  sort  of  suzerain,  without  whose  con- 
sent the  younger  brothers  could  do  nothing  important.  Thus 
the  integrity  of  the  empire  was  maintained,  which  had  been 
lost  in  the  scheme  of  Charlemagne  in  806.  But  M.  Fauriel 
(vol.  iv.  p.  83)  reasonably  suspects  an  ecclesiastical  influence 
in  suggesting  this  measure  of  817,  which  was  an  overt  act 
of  the  Roman,  or  imperial,  against  the  barbarian  party.  If 
the  latter  consented  to  this  in  817,  it  was  probably  either 
because  they  did  not  understand  it,  or  because  they  trusted 
So  setting  it  aside.  And,  as  is  well  known,  the  course  of 
events  soon  did  this  for  them.  "  It  is  indisputable,"  says 
*lanke,  "  that  the  order  of  succession  to  the  throne,  which 
Cjouis  the  Pious,  in  utter  disregard  of  the  warnings  of  his 
'aithful  adherents,  and  in  opposition  to  all  German  modes  of 
•hinking,  established  in  the  year  817,  was  principally  brought 
about  by  the  influence  of  the  clergy."  (Hist,  of  Reforma- 
tion, Mrs.  Austin's  translation,  vol.  i.  p.  9.)  He  attributes 
the  concurrence  of  that  order,  in  the  subsequent  revolt 
against  Louis,  to  the  endeavors  he  had  made  to  deviate  from 
the  provisions  of  819  in  favor  of  his  youngest  son,  Charles 
the  Bald. 

Note  XII.     Page  31. 

The  second  period  of  Carlovingian  history,  or  that  which 
elapsed  from  the  reign  of  Charles  the    Bald  to  the  accession 


Chap.  I.  THE  CARLO VINGIANS.  131 

of  Hugh  Capet,  must  be  reckoned  the  transitional  state, 
through  scenes  of  barbarous  anarchy,  from  the  artificial 
scheme  devised  by  Charlemagne,  in  which  the  Roman  and 
German  elements  of  civil  policy  were  rather  in  conflict 
than  in  union,  to  a  new  state  of  society  —  the  feudal,  which, 
though  pregnant  itself  with  great  evil,  was  the  means  both 
of  preserving  the  frame  of  European  policy  from  disintegra- 
tion, and  of  elaborating  the  moral  and  constitutional  princi- 
ples upon  which  it  afterwards  rested. 

This  period  exhibits,  upon  the  whole,  a  failure  of  the 
grand  endeavor  made  by  Charlemagne  for  the  regeneration 
of  his  empire.  This  proceeded  very  much  from  the  common 
chances  of  hereditary  succession,  especially  when  not  coun- 
terbalanced by  established  powers  independent  of  it.  Three 
of  his  name,  Charles  the  Bald,  the  Fat,  and  the  Simple,  had 
time  to  pull  down  what  the  great  legislator  and  conqueror 
had  erected.  Encouraged  by  their  pusillanimity  and  weak- 
ness, the  nobility  strove  to  revive  the  spirit  of  the  seventh 
century.  They  entered  into  a  coalition  with  the  bishops, 
though  Charles  the  Bald  had  often  sheltered  himself  behind 
the  crosier ;  and  they  compelled  his  son,  Louis  the  Stam- 
merer, not  only  to  confirm  their  own  privileges  and  those  of 
he  Church,  but  to  style  himself  "  King,  by  the  grace  of  God 
ind  election  of  the  people  ; "  which,  indeed,  according  to  the 
established  constitution,  was  no  more  than  truth,  since  the 
■Obsolute  right  to  succession  was  only  in  the  family.  The  ina- 
oility  of  the  crown  to  protect  its  subjects  from  their  invaders 
rendered  this  assumption  of  aristocratic  independence  abso- 
lutely necessary.  In  this  age  of  agony,  Sismondi  well  says, 
the  nation  began  to  revive  ;  new  social  bodies  sprung  from  the 
carcass  of  the  great  empire.  France,  so  defenceless  under 
the  Bald  and  the  Fat  Charleses,  bristled  with  castles  before 
930.  She  renewed  the  fable  of  Deucalion ;  she  sowed  stones, 
and  armed  men  rose  out  of  them.  The  lords  surrounded 
themselves  with  vassals ;  and  had  not  the  Norman  incursions 
ceased  before,  they  would  have  met  with  a  much  more  deter- 
mined resistance  than  in  the  preceding  century.  (Hist,  des 
Francois,  iii.  218,  378;  iv.  9.) 

Notwithstanding  the  weakness  of  the  throne,  the  promise 
of  the  Franks  to  Pepin,  that  they  would  never  elect  a  king 
out  of  any  other  family,  though  broken  on  two  or  three  occa- 
sions in  the  tenth  century,  seems  to  have  retained  its  hold 


132  TRANSITION   FERroD   OF  Noras  r% 

upon  the  nation,  so  that  an  hereditary  right  in  his  house  wa« 
felt  as  a  constitutional  sentiment,  until  experience  and  neces- 
sity overcame  it.  The  first  interruption  to  this  course  was 
at  the  election  of  Eudes,  on  the  death  of  Charles  the  Fat,  in 
888.  Charles  the  Simple,  son  of  Carloman,  a  prince  whose 
short  and  obscure  reign  over  France  had  ended  in  884 
being  himself  the  only  surviving  branch,  in  a  legitimate  line, 
of  the  imperial  house  (for  the  frequent  deaths  of  those 
princes  without  male  issue  is  a  remarkable  and  important 
circumstance),  was  an  infant  of  three  years  old.  The  king- 
dom was  devastated  by  the  Normans,  whom  it  was  just 
beginning  to  resist  with  somewhat  more  energy  than  for  the 
last  half-century ;  and  Eudes,  a  man  of  considerable  vigor, 
possessed  several  counties  in  the  best  parts  of  France.  The 
nation  had  no  alternative  but  to  choose  him  for  their  kins:. 
Yet,  when  Charles  attained  the  age  of  fifteen,  a  numerous 
party  supported  his  claim  to  the  throne,  which  he  would 
probably  have  substantiated,  if  the  disparity  of  abilities  be- 
tween the  competitors  had  been  less  manifest.  Eudes,  at 
his  death,  is  said  to  have  recommended  Charles  to  his  own 
party ;  and  it  is  certain  that  he  succeeded  without  opposition. 
His  own  weak  character,  however,  exposing  him  to  fresh 
rebellion,  Robert,  brother  of  Eudes.  and  his  son-in-law  Ro- 
dolph,  became  kings  of  France,  that  is,  we  find  their  names  in 
the  royal  list,  and  a  part  of  the  kingdom  acknowledged  their 
sovereignty.  But  the  south  stood  off  altogether,  and  Charles 
preserved  the  allegiance  of  the  north-eastern  provinces. 
Robert,  in  fact,  who  was  killed  one  year  after  his  partisans 
had  proclaimed  him,  seems  to  have  no  great  pretensions,  de 
facto  any  more  than  de  jure,  to  be  reckoned  at  all :  nor  does 
any  historian  give  the  appellation  of  Robert  II.  to  the  son 
of  Hugh  Capet.  The  father  of  Hugh  Capet,  Hugh  the 
Great,  son  of  Robert  and  nephew  of  Eudes,  being  count  of 
Paris  and  Orleans,  who  had  bestowed  the  crown  on  his 
brother-in-law  Rodolph  of  Burgundy,  instead  of  wearing  it 
himself,  paid  such  deference  to  the  prejudices  of  at  least  the 
majority  of  the  nation  in  favor  of  the  house  of  Charlemagne, 
that  he  procured  the  election  of  Louis  IV.,  son  of  Charles 
the  Simple,  a  boy  of  thirteen  years,  and  then  an  exile  in 
England;  from  which  circumstance  he  has  borne  the  name 
of  Outremer  And  though  he  did  not  reign  without  some 
opposition  from  his  powerful  vassal,  he  died  in  possession  of 


Chap.  I.  THE  CARLOVINGIANS.  133 

the  crown,  and  transmitted  it  to  be  worn  by  his  son  Loihaire, 
and  his  grandson  Louis  V.  It  was  on  the  death  of  this  last 
young  man  that  Hugh  Capet  thought  it  time  to  set  aside  the 
rights  of  Charles,  the  late  king's  uncle,  and  call  himself* 
king,  with  no  more  national  consent  than  the  prelates  and 
barons  who  depended  on  him  might  afford:  principally,  it 
seems,  through  the  adherence  of  Adalberon,  archbishop  of 
Rheims,  a  city  in  which  the  king-  were  already  wont  to 
receive  the  crown.  Such  is  the  national  importance  which 
a  merely  local  privilege  may  sometimes  bestow.  Even  the 
voice  of  the  capital,  regular  or  tumultuous,  which  in  so  many 
revolutions  has  determined  the  obedience  of  a  nation,  may 
be  considered  as  little  more  than  a  local  superiority. 

A  writer  distinguished  among  living  historians,  M.  Thi- 
erry, has  found  a  key  to  all  the  revolutions  of  two  centuries 
in  the  antipathy  of  the  Romans,  that  is,  the  ancient  inhab- 
itants, to  the  Franks  or  Germans.  The  latter  were  repre- 
sented by  the  house  of  Charlemagne ;  the  former  by  that  of 
Robert  the  Brave,  through  its  valiant  descendants,  Eude>, 
Robert,  and  Hugh  the  Great.  And  this  theory  of  races,  to 
which  M.  Thierry  is  always  partial,  and  recurs  on  many 
occasions,  has  seemed  to  the  judicious  and  impartial  Guizot 
the  most  satisfactory  of  all  that  have  been  devised  to  eluci- 
date the  Carlovingian  period,  though  he  does  not  embrace  it 
to  its  full  extent.  (Hist,  de  la  Civilisation  en  France,  Lecon 
24.)  Sismondi  (vol.  iii.  p.  58)  had  said  in  1821,  what  he 
had  probably  written  as  early  as  M.  Thierry:  ki  La  guerre 
entre  Charles  et  ses  deux  freres  tut  celle  des  peuples  romains, 
des  Gaules  qui  rejetaient  le  joug  germanique  ;  la  querelle 
insignitiante  des  rois  fut  soutenue  avec  ardeur,  parce  qu'elle 
s'unissait  a  la  querelle  des  peuples;  et  tous  ces  prejuges  hos- 
tiles  qui  s'attachent  toujours  aux  differences  des  langues  et 
des  mceurs,  donnerent  de  la  Constance  et  de  Pacharnement 
aux  combattans."  This  relates,  indeed,  to  an  earlier  period, 
but  still  to  the  same  conflict  of  races  which  M.  Thierry  has 
taken  as  the  basis  of  the  resistance  made  by  the  Neustrian 
provinces  to  the  later  Carlovingians.  Thierry  finds  a  similar 
contest  in  the  wars  of  Louis  the  Debonair.  In  this  he  is 
compelled  to  suppose  that  the  Neustrian  Franks  fell  in  with 
the  Gauls,  among  whom  they  lived.  But  it  may  well  be 
doubted  whether  the  distinction  of  Frank  descent,  and  con- 
sequently of  national  supremacy,  was  obliterated  in  the  first 


VS4  TRANSITION   PERIOD  OF  Kotbs  to 

part  of  the  ninth  century.  The  name  of  Franci  was  always 
applied  to  the  whole  people;  the  king?;  arc  always  reges 
Francorum  ;  so  that  we  might  in  some  respect-  rather  say 
that  the  Gaul-  or  Romans  had  been  merged  in  the  dominant 
races  than  the  reverse.  "Wealth,  also,  and  especially  that 
springing  from  hereditary  benefices,  was  chiefly  in  the  hands 
of  /.he  barbarians  ;  they  alone,  as  is  generally  believed,  so 
long  as  the  distinction  of  personal  law  subsisted,  were  sum- 
moned to  county  or  national  assemblies ;  they  perhaps  re- 
tained, in  the  reign  of  Louis  the  Debonair,  though  we  cannot 
speak  decisively  as  to  this,  their  original  language.  It  has 
been  observed  that  the  famous  oath  in  the  Romance  language, 
pronounced  by  Louis  of  Germany  at  the  treaty  of  Strasburg, 
in  842,  and  addressed  to  the  army  of  his  brother  Charles  the 
Bald,  bears  more  traces  of  the  southern,  or  Provencal,  than 
of  the  northern  dialect ;  and  it  is  probable  that  the  inhabitants 
of  the  southern  provinces,  whatever  might  have  been  the 
origin  of  their  ancestors,  spoke  no  other.  This  would  not 
be  conclusive  as  to  the  Neustrian  Franks.  But  this  is  a 
disputable  question. 

A  remarkable  presumption  of  the  superiority  still  retained 
by  the  Franks  as  a  nation,  even  in  the  south  of  France,  may 
be  drawn  from  the  Placitum,  at  Carcassonne,  in  918.  (Vais- 
sette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  vol.  ii.  Append,  p.  56  ;  Meyer,  In 
stitutions  Judiciaires,  vol.  i.  p.  419.)  In  this  we  find  named 
six  Roman,  four  Gothic,  and  eight  Salian  judges.  It  is  cer- 
tain that  these  judges  could  not  have  been  taken  relatively 
to  the  population  of  the  three  races  in  that  part  of  France. 
Does  it  not  seem  most  probable  that  the  Franks  were  still 
reckoned  the  predominant  people  ?  Probably,  however,  the 
personal  distinction,  founded  on  difference  of  laws,  expired 
earlier  in  Neustria ;  not  that  the  Franks  fell  into  the  Roman 
jurisprudence,  but  that  the  original  natives  adopted  the  feu- 
dal customs. 

This  specious  theory  of  hostile  races,  in  order  to  account 
for  the  downfall  of  the  Carlovingian,  or  Australian,  dynasty, 
has  not  been  unanimously  received,  especially  in  the  extent 
to  which  Thierry  has  urged  it.  M.  Gaudet,  the  French 
editor  of  Richer  (a  contemporary  historian,  whose  narrative 
of  the  whole  period,  from  the  accession  of  Eudes  to  the 
death  of  Hugh  Capet,  is  published  by  Pertz  in  the  Monu- 
menta   Germaniae   Historica,  vol.  ill.,  and  contains  a  great 


Chap.  I.  THE  CARLOVINGIANS.  135 

quantity  of  new  and  interesting  facts,  especially  from  a.d 
966  to  987),  appeals  to  this  writer  in  contradiction  of  the 
hypothesis  of  M.  Thierry.  The  appeal,  however,  is  not  solely 
upon  his  authority,  since  the  leading  circumstances  were 
sufficiently  known ;  and,  to  say  the  truth,  1  think  that  more 
has  been  made  of  Richer's  testimony  in  this  particular  view 
than  it  will  bear.  Richer  belonged  to  a  monastery  at  Rlieims, 
and  his  father  had  been  a  man  of  some  rank  in  the  confi- 
dence of  Louis  IV.  and  Lothaire.  He  had,  therefore,  been 
nursed  in  respect  for  the  house  of  Charlemagne,  though,  with 
deference  to  his  editor,  I  do  not  perceive  that  he  displays  any 
repugnance  to  the  change  of  dynasty. 

Though  the  differences  of  origin  and  lauo;ua2;e,  so  far  as 
they  existed,  might  be  by  no  means  unimportant  in  the  great 
revolution  near  the  close  of  the  tenth  century,  they  cannot 
be  relied  upon  as  sufficiently  explaining  its  cause.  The  par- 
tisans of  either  family  were  not  exclusively  of  one  blood. 
The  house  of  Capet  itself  was  not  of  Roman,  but  probably 
of  Saxon  descent.  The  difference  of  races  had  been  much 
effaced  after  Charles  the  Bald,  but  it  is  to  be  remembered 
that  the  great  beneficiaries,  the  most  wealthy  and  potent 
families  in  Neu stria  or  France,  were  of  barbarian  origin. 
One  people,  so  far  as  we  can  distinguish  them,  was  by  far 
the  more  numerous  ;  the  other,  of  more  influence  in  political 
affairs.  The  personal  distinction  of  law,  however,  which  had 
been  the  test  of  descent,  appears  not  to  have  been  preserved 
in  the  north  of  France  much  after  the  ninth  century  ;  and 
the  Roman,  as  has  been  said  above,  had  yielded  to  the  bar- 
baric element  —  to  the  feudal  customs.  The  Romance  lan- 
guage, on  the  other  hand,  had  obtained  a  complete  ascenden- 
cy ;  and  that  not  only  in  Neustria,  or  the  parts  west  of  the 
Somine,  but  throughout  Picardy,  Champagne,  and  part  of 
Flanders.  But  if  we  were  to  suppose  that  these  regions  were 
still  in  some  way  more  Teutonic  in  sentiment  than  Neustria, 
we  certainly  could  not  say  the  same  of  those  beyond  the 
Loire.  Aquitaine  and  Languedoc,  almost  wholly  Roman,  to 
use  the  ancient  word,  or  French,  as  they  might  now  be  called, 
among  whose  vine-covered  hills  the  barbarians  of  the  Lower 
Rhine  had  hardly  formed  a  permanent  settlement,  or,  having 
done  so,  had  early  cast  off  the  slough  of  their  rude  manners, 
had  been  the  scenes  of  a  long  resistance  to  the  Merovingian 
dynasty.     The  tyranny  of  Childeric  and  Clotaire,  the  bar- 


136  TRANSITION  PERIOD  OF  Notes  to 

barism  of  the  Frank  invaders,  had  created  an  indelible 
hatred  of  their  yoke.  But  they  submitted  without  reluctance 
to  the  more  civilized  government  of  Charlemagne,  and  dis- 
played a  spontaneous  loyalty  towards  his  line.  Never  did 
they  recognize,  at  least  without  force,  the  Neustrian  usurpers 
of  the  tenth  century,  or  date  their  legal  instruments,  in  truth 
the  chief  sign  of  subjection  that  they  gave,  by  any  other 
year  than  that  of  the  Carlovingian  sovereign.  If  Charles 
the  Simple  reaped  little  but  this  nominal  allegiance  from  his 
southern  subjects,  he  had  the  satisfaction  to  reflect  that  they 
owned  no  one  else. 

But  a  rapacious  aristocracy  had  pressed  so  hard  on  the 
weakness  of  Charles  the  Bald  and  his  descendants  that,  the 
kingdom  being  wholly  parcelled  in  great  fiefs,  they  had  not 
the  resources  left  to  reward  self-interested  services  as  before, 
nor  to  resist  a  vassal  far  superior  to  themselves.  Laon  was 
much  behind  Paris  in  wealth  and  populousness,  and  yet  even 
the  twTo  capitals  were  inadequate  representatives  of  the  pro- 
portionate strength  of  the  king  and  the  count.  Power,  as 
simply  taken,  was  wholly  on  one  side ;  yet  on  the  other  was 
prejudice,  or  rather  an  abstract  sense  of  hereditary  right; 
and  this  sometimes  became  a  source  of  power.  But  the  long 
greatness  of  one  family,  its  manifest  influence  over  the  suc- 
cession to  the  throne,  the  conspicuous  men  whom  it  produced 
in  Eudes  and  Hugh  the  Great,  had  silently  prepared  the 
way  for  a  revolution,  neither  unnatural  nor  premature,  nor  in 
any  way  dangerous  to  the  public  interests.  It  is  certainly 
probable  that  the  Neustrian  French  had  come  to  feel  a 
greater  sympathy  with  the  house  of  Capet  than  with  a  line 
of  kings  who  rarely  visited  their  country,  and  whom  they 
could  not  but  contemplate  as  in  some  adverse  relation  to  their 
natural  and  popular  chiefs.  But  the  national  voice  was  not 
greatly  consulted  in  those  ages.  It  is  remarkable  that  sev- 
eral writers  of  the  nineteenth  century,  however  they  may 
sometimes  place  the  true  condition  of  the  people  in  a  vivid 
light,  are  constantly  relapsing  into  a  democratic  theory. 
They  do  not  by  any  means  underrate  the  oppressed  and 
almost  servile  condition  of  the  peasantry  and  burgesses,  when 
it  is  their  aim  to  draw  a  picture  of  society;  vet  in  reasoning 
on  a  political  revolution,  such  as  the  decline  and  fall  of  the 
German  dynasty,  they  ascribe  to  these  degraded  classes  both 
die  will  and  the  power  to  effect  it.     The  proud   nationality 


Chap.  I.  l'HE  CARLOVINGIANS.  137 

which  spurned  a  foreign  line  of  princes  could  not  be  felt  hy 
an  impoverished  and  afflicted  commonalty.  Yet  when  M. 
Thierry  alludes  to  the  rumor  that  the  family  of  Capet  was 
sprung  from  the  commons  (some  said,  as  we  read  in  Dante, 
from  a  butcher),  he  adds,  —  "  Cette  opinion,  qui  se  conserva 
durant  plusieurs  siecles,  ne  fut  pas  nuisible  a  sa  cause,"  —  as 
if  there  had  been  as  effective  atiers-etat  in  987  as  800  yeai'3 
afterwards.  If,  however,  we  are  meant  only  to  seek  this 
sentiment  among  the  nobles  of  France,  I  fear  that  self- 
interest,  personal  attachments,  and  a  predominant  desire  of 
maintaining  their  independence  against  the  crown,  were 
motives  far  more  in  operation  than  the  wish  to  hear  the  king 
speak  French  instead  of  German. 

It  seems,  upon  the  whole,  that  M.  Thierry's  hypothesis, 
countenanced  as  it  is  by  M.  Guizot,  will  not  afford  a  com- 
plete explanation  of  the  history  of  France  between  Charles 
the  Fat  and  Hugh  Capet.  The  truth  is,  that  the  accidents  of 
personal  character  have  more  to  do  with  the  revolutions  of 
nations  than  either  philosophical  historians  or  democratic 
politicians  like  to  admit.  If  Eudes  and  Hugh  the  Great 
had  been  born  in  the  royal  line,  they  would  have  preserved 
far  better  the  royal  power.  If  Charles  the  Simple  had  not 
raised  too  hisdi  a  favorite  of  mean  extraction,  he  mi^ht  have 
retained  the  nobles  of  Lorraine  and  Champagne  in  their 
fidelity.  If  Adalberon,  archbishop  of  Rheims,  had  been 
loyal  to  the  house  of  Charlemagne,  that  of  Capet  would  not, 
at  least  so  soon,  have  ascended  the  throne.  If  Louis  V.  had 
lived  some  years,  and  left  a  son  to  inherit  the  lineal  right, 
the  more  precarious  claim  of  his  uncle  would  not  have 
undergone  a  disadvantageous  competition  with  that  of  a  vig- 
orous usurper.  M.  Gaudet  has  well  shown,  in  his  notice  on 
Richer,  that  the  opposition  of  Adelberon  to  Charles  of  Lor- 
raine was  wholly  on  personal  grounds.  No  hint  is  given  of 
any  national  hostility  ;  but  whatever  of  national  approbation 
was  given  to  the  new  family,  and  doubtless  in  Neustrian 
France  it  was  very  prevalent,  must  rather  be  ascribed  to 
their  OAvn  reputation  than  to  any  peculiar  antipathy  towards 
their  competitor.  Hugh  Capet,  it  is  recorded,  never  wore 
the  crown,  though  styling  himself  king,  and  took  care  to 
procure,  in  an  assembly  held  in  Paris,  the  election  of  his 
son  Robert  to  succeed  him;  an  example  which  was  folio  wed 
for  several  reigns. 


138  T  H  E   N  <  >  It  MA  X  S .  No  rEs  to 

A  late  Belgian  writer,  M.  Gerard,  in  a  Bpirited  little  work, 
La  Barbarie  Franque  et  la  Civilisation  Romaine '  (Brux- 
elles,  1845),  admitting  the  theory  of  the  conflict  of  nu 
indignantly  repels  the  partisans  of  what  has  been  called  the 
Roman  element.  Thierry,  Michelet,  and  even  G-uizot, 
are  classed  by  him  as  advocates  of  a  corrupted  race  of 
degenerate  provincials,  who  called  themselves  Romans, 
endeavoring  to  set  up  their  pretended  civilization  against  the 
free  and  generous  spirit  of  the  barbarians  from  whom  Europe 
has  derived  her  proudest  inheritance.  Avoiding  the  aristo- 
cratic arrogance  of  Boulainvilliers,  and  laughing  justly  at  the 
pretensions  of  modern  French  nobles,  if  any  such  there  are, 
which  I  disbelieve,  who  vaunt  their  descent  as  an  order  from 
the  race  of  Franks,  he  bestows  his  admiration  on  the  old 
Austrasian  portion  of  the  monarchy,  to  which,  as  a  Belgian, 
he  belongs.  But  in  his  persuasion  that  the  two  races  were 
in  distinct  opposition  to  each  other,  and  have  continued  so 
ever  since,  he  hardly  falls  short  of  Michelet. 

I  will  just  add  to  this  long  note  a  caution  to  the  reader, 
that  it  relates  only  to  the  second  period  of  the  Carlovingian 
kings,  that  from  888  to  987.  In  the  reigns  of  Louis  the 
Debonair  and  Charles  the  Bald  I  do  not  deny  that  the  desire 
for  the  separation  of  the  empire  was  felt  on  both  sides.  But 
this  separation  was  consummated  at  Verdun  in  843,  except 
that,  the  kingdom  of  Lorraine  being  not  long  afterwards  dis- 
membered, a  small  portion  of  the  modern  Belgium  fell  into 
that  of  France. 

Note  XIII.     Page  35. 

The  cowardice  of  the  French,  during  the  Norman  incur 
sions  of  the  ninth  century,  has  struck  both  ancient  and 
modern  writers,  considering  that  the  invaders  were  by  no 
means  numerous,  and  not  better  armed  than  the  inhabitants. 
No  one,  says  Paschasius  Radbert,  could  have  anticipated 
that  a  kingdom  so  powerful,  extensive,  and  populous,  would 
have  been  ravaged  by  a  handful  of  barbarians.  (Mem.  de 
l'Acad.  des  Inscr.  vol.  xv.  p.  639.)  Two  hundred  Normans 
entered  Paris,  in  865,  to  take  away  some  wine,  and  retired 
unmolested;  their  usual  armies  seem  to  have  been  only  of  a 
few  hundreds.  (Sismondi,  vol.  iii.  p.  170.)  Michelet  even 
fancies  that  the  French  could  not  have  fought  so  obstinately 


Chap.  I.  THE  NORMANS.  131 

at  Fontenay  as  historians  relate,  on  account  of  the  effeminacy 
which  ecclesiastical  influence  had  produced.  This  is  rather 
an  extravagant  supposition.  But  panic  is  very  contagious, 
and  sometimes  falls  on  nations  by  no  means  deficient  in  gen- 
eral courage.  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  cities,  even 
Paris,  were  not  fortified  (Mem.  de  l'Acad.  vol.  xvii.  p.  289)  ; 
that  the  government  of  Charles  the  Bald  was  imbecile ;  that 
no  efforts  were  made  to  array  and  discipline  the  people ;  that 
the  feudal  polity  was  as  yet  incomplete  and  unorganized. 
Can  it  be  an  excessive  reproach,  that  the  citizens  fled  from 
their  dwellings,  or  redeemed  them  by  money  from  a  terrible 
foe  against  whom  their  mere  superiority  of  numbers  furnished 
no  security  ?  Every  instance  of  barbarous  devastation 
aggravated  the  general  timidity.  Aquitaine  was  in  such  a 
state  that  the  pope  removed  the  archbishop  of  Bordeaux  to 
Bourges,  because  his  province  was  entirely  wasted  by  the 
pagans.  (Sismondi,  vol.  iii.  p.  210.)  Never  was  France  in 
so  deplorable  a  condition  as  under  Charles  the  Bald ;  the 
laity  seem  to  have  deserted  the  national  assemblies ;  almost 
all  his  capitularies  are  ecclesiastical ;  he  was  the  mere  ser- 
vant of  his  bishops.  The  clergy  were  now  at  their  zenith ; 
and  it  has  been  supposed  that,  noble  families  becoming' 
extinct  (for  few  names  of  laymen  appear  at  this  time  in  his- 
tory), the  Church,  which  always  gained  and  never  lost,  took 
the  ascendant  in  national  councils.  And  this  contributed  to 
render  the  nation  less  warlike,  by  depriving  it  of  its  natural 
leaders.  It  might  be  added,  according  to  Sismondi's  very 
probable  suggestion,  that  the  faith  in  relics,  encouraged 
by  the  Church,  lowered  the  spirit  of  the  people.  (Vol.  iii. 
passim;  Michelet,  vol.  ii.  p.  120,  et  post.)  And  it  is  a 
quality  of  superstition  not  to  be  undeceived  by  experience. 
Some  have  attributed  the  weakness  of  France  at  this  period 
to  the  bloody  battle  of  Fontenay,  in  841.  But  if  we  should 
suppose  the  loss  of  the  kingdom  on  that  day  to  have  been 
forty  thousand,  which  is  a  high  reckoning,  this  would  not 
explain  the  want  of  resistance  to  the  Normans  for  half  a 
century. 

The  beneficial  effect  of  the  cession  of  Normandy  has  hard- 
ly been  put  by  me  in  sufficiently  strong  terms.     No  measurf 
was  so  conducive  to  the  revival  of  France  from  her  abasr 
ment   in  the  ninth   century.     The    Normans    had  been  dis 
tinguished  by  a  peculiar  ferocity  towards  priests ;  yet  when 


140  THE  NORMANS.  Notes  to 

their  conversion  to  Christianity  was  made  the  condition  of 
their  possessing  Normandy,  they  were  ready  enough  to  com- 
ply, and  in  another  generation  became  among  the  most 
devout  of  the  French  nation.  It  maybe  observed  that  pagan 
superstitions,  though  they  often  take  great  hold  on  the  imag- 
ination, seldom  influence  the  conscience  or  sense  of  duty ; 
they  are  not  definite  or  moral  enough  for  such  an  effect, 
which  belongs  to  positive  religions,  even  when  false.  And  as 
their  efficacy  over  the  imagination  itself  is  generally  a  good 
deal  dependent  on  local  associations,  it  is  likely  to  be  weak- 
ened by  a  change  of  abode.  But  a  more  certain  explana- 
tion of  the  new  zeal  for  Christianity  which  sprung  up  among 
the  Normans  may  be  found  in  the  important  circumstance, 
that,  having  few  women  with  them,  they  took  wives  (they 
had  made  widows  enough)  from  the  native  inhabitants. 
These  taught  their  own  faith  to  their  children.  They  taught 
also  their  own  language ;  and  in  no  other  manner  can  we  so 
well  account  for  the  rapid  extinction  of  that  of  Scandinavia 
in  that  province  of  France. 

Sismondi  discovers  two  causes  for  the  determination  of  the 
Normans  to  settle  peaceably  in  the  territory  assigned  to 
them ;  the  devastation  which  they  had  made  along  the  coast, 
rendering  it  difficult  to  procure  subsistence  ;  and  the  growing 
spirit  of  resistance  in  the  French  nobility,  who  were  fortify- 
ing their  castles  and  training  their  vassals  on  every  side. 
But  we  need  not  travel  far  for  an  inducement  to  occupy  the 
fine  lands  on  the  Seine  and  Eure.  Piracy  and  plunder  had 
become  their  resource,  because  they  could  no  longer  find  sub- 
sistence at  home ;  they  now  found  it  abundantly  in  a  more 
genial  climate.  They  would  probably  have  accepted  the 
same  terms  fifty  years  before. 

Note  XIV.     Page  36. 

This  has  been  put  in  the  strongest  language  by  Sismondi, 
Thierry,  and  other  writers.  Guizot,  however,  thinks  that  it 
has  been  urged  too  far,  and  that  the  first  four  Capet  ians  were 
not  quite  so  insignificant  in  their  kingdom  as  has  been 
asserted.  "  When  we  look  closely  at  the  documents  and 
events  of  their  age,  we  see  that  they  have  played  a  more 
important  part,  and  exerted  more  influence,  than  is  ascribed 
to  them.     Read  their  history ;  you  will  see  them  interfere 


Chap.  i.  THE    CAPETS.  141 

incessantly,  whether  by  arms  or  by  negotiation,  in  the  affairs 
of  the  county  of  Burgundy,  of  the  county  of  Anjou,  of  the 
county  of  Maine,  of  the  duchy  of  Guienne ;  in  a  word,  in 
the  affairs  of  all  their  neighbors,  and  even  of  very  distant 
fiefs.  No  other  suzerain  certainly,  except  the  dukes  of  Nor- 
mandy, who  conquered  a  kingdom,  took  a  part  at  that  time 
sc  frequently,  and  at  so  great  a  distance  from  the  centre  of 
his  domains.  Turn  over  the  letters  of  contemporaries,  for 
example  those  of  Fulbert  and  of  Yves,  bishops  of  Chartres, 
or  those  of  William  III.  duke  of  Guienne,  and  many  others, 
you  will  see  that  the  king  of  France  was  not  without 
importance,  and  that  the  most  powerful  suzerains  treated  him 
with  great  deference."  He  appeals  especially  to  the  extant 
act  of  the  consecration  of  Philip  I.,  in  1059,  where  a  duke 
of  Guienne  is  mentioned  among  the  great  feudataries,  and 
asks  whether  any  other  suzerain  took  possession  of  his  rank 
with  so  much  solemnity.  (Civilisation  en  France,  Lecon  42.) 
"  As  there  was  always  a  country  called  France  and  a  French 
people,  so  there  was  always  a  king  of  the  French ;  very  far 
indeed  from  ruling  the  country  called  his  kingdom,  and  with- 
out influence  on  the  greater  part  of  the  population,  but  yet  no 
foreigner,  and  with  his  name  inscribed  at  the  head  of  the 
deeds  of  all  the  local  sovereigns,  as  one  who  was  their 
superior,  and  to  whom  they  owed  several  duties."  (Lecon 
13.)  It  may  be  observed  also  that  the  Church  recognized 
no  other  sovereign ;  not  that  all  the  bishops  held  of  him, 
for  many  depended  on  the  great  fiefs,  but  the  ceremony  of 
consecration  gave  him  a  sort  of  religious  character,  to  which 
no  one  else  aspired.  And  Suger,  the  politic  minister  of  Louis 
VI.  and  Louis  VII.,  made  use  of  the  bishops  to  maintain  the 
royal  authority  in  distant  provinces.  (Leyon  42.)  This 
nevertheless  rather  proves  that  the  g^rm  of  future  power 
was  in  the  kingly  office  than  that  Hugh,  Robert,  Henry,  and 
Philip  exercised  it.  The  most  remarkable  instance  of 
authority  during  their  reigns  was  the  war  of  Robert  in  Bur 
gundy,  which  ended  in  his  bestowing  that  great  fief  on  his 
brother.  I  have  observed  that  the  duke  of  Guienne  sub- 
scribes a  charter  of  Henry  I.  in  1051.  (Rec.  des  Historiens, 
vol.  xi.  p.  589.)  Probably  there  are  other  instances.  Henry 
uses  a  more  pompous  and  sovereign  phraseology  in  his 
diplomas  than  his  father;  the  young  lion  was  trying  hi? 
roar. 


142  THE  KNIGHTS   TEMPLARS.  Notes   to 

I  concur  on  the  whole  in  thinking  with  M.  Guizot,  that  in 
shunning  the  language  of  uninformed  historians,  who  spoke 
of  all  kings  of  France  as  equally  supreme,  it  had  become 
usual  to  depreciate  the  power  of  the  first  Capetians  rather 
too  much.  He  had,  however,  to  appearance,  done  the  same 
a  few  years  before  the  delivery  of  these  lectures,  in  1829; 
for  in  his  Collection  of  Memoirs  (vol.  i.  p.  G,  published  in 
1 825),  he  speaks  rather  differently  of  the  first  four  reigns  :  — 
;'  C'est  l'epoque  ou  le  royaume  de  France  et  la  nation  fran- 
caise  n'ont  existe,  a  vrai  dire,  que  de  nom."  He  observes, 
also,  that  the  chroniclers  of  the  royal  domain  are  peculiarly 
meagre,  as  compared  with  those  of  Normandy. 

Note  XV.     Page  56. 

It  may  excite  surprise  that  in  any  sketch,  however  slight, 
of  the  reign  of  Philip  IV.,  no  mention  should  be  made  of  an 
event,  than  which  none  in  his  life  is  more  celebrated  —  the 
fate  of  the  Knights  Templars.  But  the  truth  is,  that  when 
I  first  attended  to  the  subject,  almost  forty  years  since,  I 
could  not  satisfy  my  mind  on  the  disputed  problem  as  to  the 
guilt  imputed  to  that  order,  and  suppressed  a  note  which  I 
had  written,  as  too  inconclusive  to  afford  any  satisfactory  deci- 
sion. Much  has  been  published  since  on  the  Continent,  and 
the  question  has  assumed  a  different  aspect ;  though,  perhaps, 
I  am  not  yet  more  prepared  to  give  an  absolutely  determi 
nate  judgment  than  at  first. 

The  general  current  of  popular  writers  in  the  eighteenth 
century  was  in  favor  of  the  innocence  of  the  Templars ;  in 
England  it  would  have  been  almost  paradoxical  to  doubt  of 
it.  The  rapacious  and  unprincipled  character  of  Philip,  the 
submission  of  Clement  V.  to  his  will,  the  apparent  incredi- 
bility of  the  charges  from  their  monstrousness,  the  just  prej- 
udice against  confessions  obtained  by  torture  and  retracted 
afterwards  —  the  other  prejudice,  not  always  so  just,  but  in 
the  case  of  those  not  convicted  on  fair  evidence  deserving  a 
better  name  in  favor  of  assertions  of  innocence  made  on  the 
scaffold  and  at  the  stake  —  created,  as  they  still  preserve,  a 
strong  willingness  to  disbelieve  the  accusations  which  came 
so  suspiciously  before  us.  It  was  also  often  alleged  that  con- 
temporary writers  had  not  given  credit  to  these  accusations, 
and  that  in  countries  where  the  inquiry  had  been  less  iniq 


Chap.  1.  THE  KNIGHTS  TEMPLARS.  143 

uitously  conducted  no  proof  of  them  was  brought  to  light 
Of  these  two  grounds  for  acquittal,  the  former  is  of  little 
value  in  a  question  of  legal  evidence,  and  the  latter  is  not 
quite  so  fully  established  as  we  could  desire. 

Raynouard,  who  might  think  himself  pledged  to  the  vin- 
dication of  the  Knights  Templars  by  the  tragedy  he  had 
written  on  their  fate,  or  at  least  would  naturally  have  thus 
imbibed  an  attachment  to  their  cause,  took  up  their  defence 
in  a  History  of  the  Procedure.  This  has  been  reckoned  the 
best  work  on  that  side,  and  was  supposed  to  confirm  their 
innocence.  The  question  appears  to  have  assumed  some- 
thing of  a  party  character  in  France,  as  most  history  does ; 
the  honor  of  the  crown,  and  still  more  of  the  church,  had 
advocates  ;  but  there  was  a  much  greater  number,  especially 
among  men  of  letters,  who  did  not  like  a  decision  the  worse 
for  being  derogatory  to  the  credit  of  both.  Sismondi,  it  may 
easily  be  supposed,  scarcely  treats  it  as  a  question  with  two 
sides ;  but  even  Michaud,  the  firm  supporter  of  church  and 
crown,  in  his  History  of  the  Crusades,  takes  the  favorable 
view.  M.  Michelet,  however,  not  under  any  bias  towards 
either  of  these,  and  manifestly  so  desirous  to  acquit  the 
Templars  that  he  labors  by  every  ingenious  device  to  elude 
or  explain  away  the  evidence,  is  so  overcome  by  the  force 
and  number  of  testimonies,  that  he  ends  by  admitting  so 
much  as  leaves  little  worth  contending  for  by  their  patrons. 
He  is  the  editor  of  the  "  Proces  des  Templiers,"  in  the  "  Doc- 
umens  Inedits,  1841,"  and  had  previously  given  abundant  evi 
dence  of  his  acquaintance  with  the  subject  in  his  "  Histoire  de 
France,"  vol.  iv.  p.  243,  345.     (Bruxelles  edition.) 

But  the  great  change  that  has  been  made  in  this  process, 
as  carried  forward  before  the  tribunal  of  public  opinion  from 
age  to  age,  is  owing  to  the  production  of  fresh  evidence. 
The  deeply4earned  orientalist,  M.  von  Hammer,  now  count 
Hammer  Purgstall,  in  the  sixth  volume  of  a  work  published  at 
Vienna  in  1818,  with  the  title  ''Mines  de  l'Orient  exploiters,"  1 
inserted  an  essay  in  Latin,  "  Mysterium  Baphometis  Revela- 
tum,  seu  Fratres  Militias  Templi  qua  Gnostici  et  quidem 
Ophiani,  Apostasia?,  Idoloduliae,  et  Impuritatis  convicti  per 
ipsa  eorum  Monumenta."  This  is  designed  to  establish  the 
identity  of  the  idolatry  ascribed  to  the  Templars  with  that  of 

•  I  give  this  French  title,  but  there  is    memoirs  are  either  in  that  language  ol 
'i.ltfo  a  German  title-page,  as  most  of  the     in  Latin 


144  THE   KNIGHTS  TEMPLABS.  .notes  to 

the  ancient  Gnostic  sects,  and  especially  with  those  denomi- 
nated Ophites,  or  worshippers  of  the  serpent ;  and  to  prove 
also  that  the  extreme  impurity  which  forms  one  of  the  revolt- 
ing and  hardly  credible  charges  adduced  by  Philip  IV.  is 
similar  in  all  its  details  to  the  practice  of  the  Gnostics. 

This  attack  is  not.  conducted  with  all  the  coolness  which 
bespeaks  impartiality ;  but  the  evidence  is  startling  enough 
to  make  refutation  apparently  difficult.  The  first  part  of  the 
proof,  which  consists  in  identifying  certain  Gnostic  idols,  or, 
as  some  suppose,  amulets,  though  it  comes  much  to  the  same, 
with  the  description  of  what  are  called  Baphometic,  in  the 
proceedings  against  the  Templars,  published  by  Dupuy,  and 
since  in  the  "  Documens  Inedits,"  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  raise 
a  considerable  presumption.  We  find  the  word  metis  con- 
tinually on  these  images,  of  which  Von  Hammer  is  able  to 
describe  twenty-four.  Baphomet  is  a  secret  word  ascribed 
to  the  Templars.  But  the  more  important  evidence  is  that 
furnished  by  the  comparison  of  sculptures  extant  on  some 
Gnostk'  and  Ophitic  bowls  with  those  in  churches  built  by 
the  Templars.  Of  these  there  are  many  in  Germany,  and 
some  in  France.  Von  Hammer  has  examined  several  in  the 
Austrian  dominions,  and  collected  accounts  of  others.  It  is 
a  striking  fact  that  in  some  we  find,  concealed  from  the  com- 
mon observer,  images  and  symbols  extremely  obscene ;  and 
as  these,  which  cannot  here  be  more  particularly  adverted  to, 
betray  the  depravity  of  the  architects,  and  cannot  be  explained 
away,  we  may  not  so  much  hesitate  as  at  first  to  believe  that 
impiety  of  a  strange  kind  was  mingled  up  with  this  turpi- 
tude. The  presumptions,  of  course,  from  the  absolute  iden- 
tity of  many  emblems  in  churches  with  the  Gnostic  supersti- 
tions in  their  worst  form,  grow  stronger  and  stronger  by 
multiplication  of  instances ;  and  though  coincidence  might  be 
credible  in  one,  it  becomes  infinitely  improbable  in  so  many. 
One  may  here  be  mentioned,  though  among  the  slightest 
resemblances.  The  Gnostic  emblems  exhibit  a  peculiar  form 
of  cross,  T  ;  and  this  is  common  in  the  churches  built  by  the 
Templars.  But  the  freemasons,  or  that  society  of  architects 
to  whom  we  owe  so  many  splendid  churches,  do  not  escape 
M.  von  Hammer's  ill  opinion  belter  than  the  Templars. 
Though  he  conceives  them  to  be  of  earlier  origin,  they  had 
drunk  at  the  same  foul  spring  of  impious  and  impure  Gnos- 
ticism    It  is  rather  amusing  to  compare  the  sympathy  of 


Chap.  I.  THE  KNIGHTS   TEMPLARS.  145 

our  own  modern  ecclesiologists  with  those  who  raised  the 
media- val  cathedrals,  their  implicit  confidence  in  the  piety 
which  ennobled  the  conceptions  of  these  architects,  with  the 
following  passage  in  a  memoir  by  M.  von  Hammer,  "  Sur 
deux  Coffrets  Gnostiques  du  moyen  Age,  du  cabinet  de  M 
le  due  de  Blacas.     Paris,  1832." 

"  Les  architectes  du  moyen  age,  inities  dans  tons  les  my- 
steres  du  Gnosticisme  le  plus  deprave,  se  plaisaient  a  en  mul- 
tiplier les  symboles  au  dehors  et  au  dedans  de  leurs  eglises ; 
symboles  dont  le  veritable  sens  n'etait  entendu  que  des  adeptes, 
et  devaient  rester  voiles  aux  yeux  des  profanes.  Des  figures 
scandaleuses,  semblables  a  celles  des  eglises  de  Montmorillon 
et  de  Bordeaux,  se  retrouvent  sur  les  eglises  des  Templiers 
a  Eger  en  Boheme,  a  Schongrabern  en  Autriche,  a  Fornuovi 
pres  de  Parme,  et  en  d'autres  lieux ;  nommement  le  chien 
(canis  aut  gattus  niger)  sur  les  bas-reliefs  de  l'eglise  gnostique 
d'Erfurt."  (p.  9.)  The  Stadinghi,  heretics  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  are  charged,  in  a  bull  of  Gregory  IX.,  with  exactly 
the  same  profaneness,  even  including  the  black  cat,  as  the 
Templars  of  the  next  century.  This  is  said  by  von  Hammer 
to  be  confirmed  by  sculptures,     (p.  7.) 

The  statutes  of  the  Knights  Templars  were  compiled  in 
1128,  and,  as  it  is  said,  by  St,  Bernard.  They  have  been 
published  in  1840  from  manuscripts  at  Dijon,  Rome,  and 
Paris,  by  M.  Maillard  de  Chambure,  Conservateur  des  Ar- 
chives de  Bourgogne. 

The  title  runs  —  "  Regies  et  Statuts  secrets  des  Templiers." 
But  as  the  French  seems  not  so  ancient  as  the  above  date, 
they  may,  perhaps,  be  a  translation.  It  will  be  easily  sup- 
posed that  they  contain  nothing  but  what  is  pious  and  austere. 
The  knights,  however,  in  their  intercourse  with  the  East, 
fell  rapidly  into  discredit  for  loose  morals  and  many  vices ; 
so  that  Von  Hammer  rather  invidiously  begins  his  attack 
upon  them  by  arguing  the  a  priori  probability  of  what  he  is 
about  to  allege.  Some  have  accordingly  endeavored  to  steer 
a  middle  course  ;  and,  discrediting  the  charges  brought  gener- 
ally against  the  order,  have  admitted  that  both  the  vice  and 
the  irreligion  were  truly  attributed  to  a  great  number.  But 
this  is  not  at  all  the  question  ;  and  such  a  pretended  compro- 
mise is  nothing  less  than  an  acquittal.  The  whole  accusa- 
tions which  destroyed  the  order  of  the  Temple  relate  to  its 
secret  rites,  and  to  the  mode  of  initiation.     If  these  were  not 

VOL.  I,— M  10 


146  JOAN  OF  ARC.  Notes  t« 

stained  by  the  most  infamous  turpitude,  the  unhappy  knights 
perished  innocently,  and  the  guilt  of  their  death  lies  at  the 
door  of  Philip  the  Fair. 

The  novel  evidence  furnished  by  sculpture  against  the 
Templars  has  not  been  universally  received.  It  was  early 
refuted,  or  attempted  to  be  refuted,  by  Raynouard  and  other 
French  writers.  "  II  est  reconnu  aujourd'hui,  meme  en  Alle- 
magne,"  says  M.  Chambure,  editor  of  the  Regies  et  Statuts 
secrets  des  Templiers,  "  que  le  pretendu  culte  baphometique 
n'est  qu'une  chimere  de  ce  savant,  fondee  sur  un  erreur  de 
numismatique  et  d'architectonographie."  (p.  82.)  As  I  am 
not  competent  to  form  a  decisive  opinion,  T  must  leave  this 
for  the  more  deeply  learned.  The  proofs  of  M.  von  Ham- 
mer are  at  least  very  striking,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how 
they  have  been  overcome.  But  it  is  also  necessary  to  read 
the  answer  of  Raynouard  in  the  "  Journal  des  Savans "  for 
1819,  who  has  been  partially  successful  in  repelling  some  of 
his  opponent's  arguments,  though  it  appeared  to  me  that  he 
had  left  much  untouched.  It  seems  that  the  architectural 
evidence  is  the  most  positive,  and  can  only  be  resisted  by 
disproving  its  existence,  or  its  connection  with  the  Free- 
masons and  Templars.   [1848.] 

Note  XVI.     Page  88. 

I  have  followed  the  common  practice  of  translating  Jeanne 
d'Arc  by  Joan  of  Arc.  It  has  been  taken  for  granted  that 
Arc  is  the  name  of  her  birthplace.     Southey  says, — 

"  She  thought  of  Arc,  and  of  the  diugled  brook 
Whose  waves,  oft  leaping  in  their  craggy  course, 
Made  dance  the  low- hung  willow's  dripping  twigs  ; 
And,  where  it  spread  into  a  glassy  lake, 
Of  that  old  oak,  which  on  the  smooth  expanse 
Imaged  its  hoary  mossy-mantled  boughs." 

And  in  another  place,  — 

•"  her  mind's  eye 


Beheld  Domr^my  and  the  plains  of  Arc." 

It  does  not  appear,  however,  that  any  such  place  as  Arc 
exists  in  that  neighborhood,  though  there  is  a  town  of  that 
name  at  a  considerable  distance.  Joan  was,  as  is  known,  a 
native  of  the  village  of  Domremy  in  Lorraine.  The  French 
writers  all  call  her  Jeanne  d'Arc,  with  the  exception  of  one, 


Chap  i.  .fOAN  OF  ARC.  147 

M.  Michelet  (vii.  G2),  who  spells  her  name  Dare,  which  in  a 
person  of  her  birth  seems  more  probable,  though  I  cannot 
account  for  the  uniform  usage  of  an  apostrophe  and  capital 
letter. 

I  cannot  pass  Southey's  "  Joan  of  Arc  "  without  rendering 
homage  to  that  early  monument  of  his  genius,  which,  per- 
haps, he  rarely  surpassed.  It  is  a  noble  epic,  never  languid, 
and  seldom  dhTuse  ;  full  of  generous  enthusiasm,  of  magnifi- 
cent inventions,  and  with  a  well-constructed  fable,  or  rather 
selection  of  history.  Michelet,  who  thinks  the  story  of  the 
Maid  unfit  for  poetry,  had  apparently  never  read  Southey ; 
but  the  author  of  an  article  in  the  "  Biographie  Universelle  " 
says  very  well,  — "  Le  poeme  de  M.  Southey  en  Anglais, 
intitule  '  Joan  of  Arc,'  est  la  tentative  la  plus  heureuse  que 
les  Muses  aient  faites  jusqu'ici  pour  celebrer  l'heroine  d'Or- 
leans.  C'est  encore  uue  des  singularites  de  son  histoire  de 
voir  le  genie  de  la  poesie  Anglaise  inspirer  de  beaux  vers  en 
son  honneur,  tandis  que  celui  de  la  poesie  Francaise  a  eteV 
jusqu'ici  rebelle  a  ceux  qui  ont  voulu  la  chanter,  et  n'a 
favorise  que  celui  qui  a  outrage  sa  memoire."  If,  however, 
the  muse  of  France  has  done  little  justice  to  her  memory,  it 
has  been  reserved  for  another  Maid  of  Orleans,  as  she  has 
well  been  styled,  in  a  different  art,  to  fix  the  image  of  the 
first  in  our  minds,  and  to  combine,  in  forms  only  less  en- 
during than  those  of  poetry,  the  purity  and  inspiration  with 
the  unswerving  heroism  of  the  immortal  Joan. 


148  STATE   OF  ANCIENT  GERMANY.     Chap.  II.  Pari  I. 


chaptp:r  ii. 

OH  THE  FEUDAL  SYSTEM,  ESPECIALLY  IN  FRANCE. 


PART  I. 


Scat*  :f  Ancient  Germany — Effects  of  the  Conquest  of  Gaul  by  the  Franks  —  Ten- 
ures of  Land  —  nisfinction  of  Laws  —  Constitution  of  the  ancient  Frank  Monar- 
chy —  Gradual  Establishment  of  Feudal  Tenures  —  Principles  of  a  Feudal 
Relatiou  —  Ceremonies  of  Homage  and  investiture  —  Military  Service  —  Feudal 
Incidents  of  Relief,  Aid,  Wardship,  &c.  —Different  species  of  Fiefe —  Feudal 
Law-Books 

Germany,  in  the  age  of  Tacitus,  was  divided  among  a 
number  of  independent  tribes,  differing  greatly  in 

Political  .    ,.  ,    l.  .  m,     •  °    °  J 

state  of  population  and  importance.      1  heir  country,  over- 

nr-cient  spread    with    forests    and    morasses,    afforded    no 

Germany.  r  m  »  tit 

large  proportion  of  arable  land.  JNor  did  they 
( ver  occupy  the  same  land  two  years  in  succession,  if  what 
Caesar  tells  us  may  be  believed,  that  fresh  allotments  were 
annually  made  by  the  magistrates.1  But  this  could  not  have 
been  an  absolute  abandonment  of  land  once  cultivated,  which 
Horace  ascribes  to  the  migratory  Scythians.  The  German- 
had  fixed  though  not  contiguous  dwellings  :  and  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  gau  or  township  must  have  continued  to  till  the 
same  fields,  though  it  might  be  with  varying  rights  of  sepa- 
rate property.2  They  had  king-  elected  out  of  particular 
families ;  and  other  chief-,  both  for  war  and  administration  of 
justice,  whom  merit  alone  recommended  to  the  public  choice. 
But  the  power  of  each  was  greatly  limited  ;  and  the  deci- 
sion of  all  leading  questions,  though  subject  to  the  previous 

1  Magistratus  ac  principes  in  annos  non  student,  nee  quisquara  agri  modum 
•dngulos  gentibus  cognationibusque  ho-  certum  aut  fines  proprios  habet.  De 
minum.  qui  una  eoierunt,  quantum  iis,  Bello  Gallico,  1.  vi.  These  expressions 
et  quo  loco  visum  est,  attribuunt  agri,  at-  may  be  taken  bo  as  not  to  contradict 
que  anno  post  alio  trausire  cogunt.  Cae-  Tacitus.  But  Luden,  who  had  exam- 
Bar,  1.  vi.  Tacitus  confirms  this  :  Arva  ined  the  ancient  history  of  his  coun 
per  annos  mutant.  De  Mor.  Germ.  c.  try  with  the  most  persevering  diligence. 
26.  observes  that  Caesar  knew  nothing  of  the 

-  Caesar     has    not   written,    probably,  Germans,  except  what  he  had  collected 

with  accurate;  knowledge,  when  he  says,  concerning  the  Suevi  or  the  Marcomanui 

Vita  omnia  id  venationibus  et  studiis  rei  Geschichte  der  Deutschen  Volker,  I.  131 

militaris  consistit Agriculturae 


Fkudal  System.    PARTITION  OF  CONQUERED  LANDS.  149 

deliberation  of  the  chieftains,  sprung  from  the  free  voice  of  a 
popular  assembly.1  The  principal  men,  however,  of  a  Ger- 
man tribe  fully  partook  of  that  estimation  which  is  always 
the  reward  of  valor  and  commonly  of  birth.  They  were 
surrounded  by  a  cluster  of  youths,  the  most  gallant  and  am- 
bitious of  the  nation,  their  pride  at  home,  their  protection  in 
the  field  ;  whose  ambition  wa3  flattered,  or  gratitude  concilia- 
ted, by  such  presents  as  a  leader  of  barbarians  could  confer. 
These  were  the  institutions  of  the  people  who  overthrew  the 
empire  of  Rome,  congenial  to  the  spirit  of  infant  societies, 
and  such  as  travellers  have  found  among  nations  in  the  same 
stage  of  manners  throughout  the  world.  And  although,  in 
the  lapse  of  tour  centuries  between  the  ages  of  Tacitus  and 
Ciovis,  some  change  was  wrought  by  long  intercourse  with 
the  Roman-,  yet  the  foundations  of  their  political  system 
were  unshaken.  If  the  Salic  laws  were  in  the  main  drawn 
up  before  the  occupation  of  Gaul  by  the  Franks,  as  seems 
the  better  opinion,  it  is  manifest  that  lands  were  held  by  them 
in  determinate  several  possession ;  and  in  other  respects  it  is 
impossible  that  the  manners  described  by  Tacitus  should  not 
have  undergone  some  alteration.2 

When  these  tribes  from   Germany  and   the  neighboring 
countries  poured  down  upon  the  empire,  and  began  Parfcitiou 
to  form  permanent  settlements,  they  made  a  par-  of  lands  in 
tition   of  the  lands    in   the  conquered   provinces  produces, 
between  themselves    and  the   original  possessors. 
The  Burgundians  and  Visigoths  took  two  thirds  of  their  re- 
spective  conquests,  leaving  the  remainder  to  the  Roman  pro- 
prietor.    Each  Burgundian  was  quartered,  under  the  gentle 
name  of  guest,  upon  one  of  the  former  tenants,  whose  reluc- 
tant hospitality   confined  him  to  the   smaller  portion  of  his 
estate.3     The  Vandals  in  Africa,  a  more  furious  race  of  plun- 
derers, seized  all  the  best  lands.4     The  Lombards  of  Italy 

1  De  minoribus  rebus  principes  consul-  trates  this  use  of  the  word  hospes.     It 

tant,  de  majoribus  omnes;  ita  tamen,  ut  was  given  to  tbe  military  quart,  red   up- 

ea  quoque,  quorum  penes  plebem  arbi-  on  the  inhabitants  anywhere  in  the  era- 

trium  est,  apud  principes  partractentur.  pi  re,  and  thus  transferred  by  analogy  to 

Tac.  de  Mor.  Germ.  c.  xi.     Acidalius  and  the  barbarian  occupants.     It  was  need- 

Grotius  contend  for  pr^m^«?i<»r:  which  less,   I  should  think,  for  him  to   prove 

would  be  neater,  but  the  same  sense  ap-  that  these  acquisitions,  "better  consid- 

pears  to  be  conveyed  by  the  common  ered  as  allodial  laws,"  did  not  contain  the 

reading.  germ  of  feudality.     "  There  is  no  Got  hi-: 

-  [Note  I.]  feudality  unless  the  parties  be  connected 

a  Leg.  Burgund.  c.  54.  55.     Sir  F.  Pal-  by   the  mutual   bond   of  vassalage    and 

grave  has  produced  a  passage  from  the  seigniory."     Eng.  Commonw.  i.  500. 

Theodosian  code.  vii.  8  5.   which  illus-  *  Procopius  de  ttello  Vandal.  1.  i.  c.  5 


150 


ALODIAL  AND   SALIC   LANDS.     Chai>.  11.  i'art  1. 


took  a  third  part  of  the  produce.  We  cannot  di -cover  any 
mention  of  a  similar  arrangement  in  the  laws  or  history  of 
the  Franks.  It  is,  however,  clear  that  they  occupied,  by 
public  allotment  or  individual  pillage,  a  great  portion  of  the 
lands  of  Franc*.1 

The  estates  possessed  by  the  Franks  as  their  property 
Alodial  and  were  termed  alodial;  a  word  which  is  sometimes 
Saiic  lands,  restricted  to  such  as  had  descended  by  inheritance.8 
These  were  subject  to  no  burden  except  that  of  public  defence. 
They  passed  to  all  the  children  equally,  or,  in  their  failure, 
to  the  nearest  kindred.3  But  of  these  alodial  possession? 
there  was  a  particular  species,  denominated  Salic,  from  which 
females  were  expressly  excluded.  What  these  hinds  were, 
and  what  was  the  cause  of  the  exclusion,  has  been  much 
disputed.  No  solution  seems  more  probable  than  that  the 
ancient  lawgivers  of  the  Salian  Franks  prohibited  females 
from  inheriting  the  lands  assigned  to  the  nation  upon  its 
conquest  of  Gaul,  both  in  compliance  with  their  ancient 
usages,  and  in  order  to  secure  the  military  service  of  every 
proprietor.     But  lands  subsequently  acquired  by  purchase  or 


i  [Note  II.] 

2  Alodial  lands  are  commonly  opposed 
to  beneficiary  or  feudal ;  the  former  being 
strictly  proprietary,  while  the  latter  de- 
pended upon  a  superior.  In  this  sense 
the  word  is  of  continual  recurrence  in 
ancient  histories,  laws,  and  instruments. 
It  sometimes,  however,  bears  the  sense 
of  inheritance,  and  this  seems  to  be  its 
meaning  in  the  famous  62nd  chapter  of 
the  Salic  law ;  de  Alodis.  Alodium  in- 
terdum  opponitur  comparato,  says  Du 
Cange,  in  formulis  veteribus.  ilence, 
in  the  charters  of  the  eleventh  century, 
hereditary  fiefs  are  frequently  tei'med 
alodia.  Kecueil  des  Ilistoriens  de  France, 
t.  xi.  preface.  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Lan- 
guedoc,  t.  ii.  p.  109. 

Alodium  has  by  many  been  derived 
from  All  and  odh,  property.  (Du  Cange, 
et  alii.)  But  M.  Guizot,  with  some  posi- 
tiveness,  brings  it  from  loos,  lot ;  thus 
confining  the  word  to  lands  acquired  by 
lot  on  the  conquest.  But  in  the  first 
plate  this  assumes  a  regular  partition  to 
have  been  made  by  the  Franks,  which 
he,  in  another  place,  as  has  been  seen, 
does  not  acknowledge  ;  and  secondly, 
Aloditun,  or,  in  its  earlier  form,  Alodis, 
is  used  for  all  hereditary  lands.  (See 
Grimm,  Deutsche  ltechts  Alterth'dmer, 
p.  492.)  In  the  Orkneys,  where  feudal 
tenures  were  not  introduced,  the  alodial 
proprietor  is  called  an  udaller,  thus  lend- 


ing probability  to  the  former  derivation 
of  alod ;  since  it  is  only  au  inversion  of 
the  words  all  and  odh  :  but  it  seems  also 
to  corroborate  the  notion  of  Luden.  as  it 
had  been  of  Leibnitz,  that  the  word  ad  el 
or  ethel,  applied  to  designate  the  nobler 
class  of  Germans,  had  originally  the  same 
sense ;  it  distinguished  absolute  or  alo- 
dial property  from  that  which,  though 
belonging  to  freemen,  was  subject  to 
some  conditions  of  dependency.  (Gesch. 
des  Deutschen  Volkes,  vol.  i.  p.  719.) 

The  word  sors,  which  seems  to  have 
misled  several  writers .  when  applied  to 
laud  means  only  an  integral  patrimony, 
as  it  means  capital  opposed  to  interest 
when  applied  to  money.  It  is  common 
in  the  civil  law,  and  is  no  moie  than  the 
Greek  nXypog ;  but  it  had  been  peculiarly 
applied  to  the  lands  assigned  by  the 
Romans  to  the  soldiery  after  a  conquest, 
which  some  suppose,  I  know  not  on 
what  evidence,  to  have  been  by  lot. 
(Du  Cange,  voc.  Sens.)  And  hence  this 
term  was  most  probably  adopted  by  the 
barbarians,  or  rather  those  who  rendered 
their  laws  into  Latin.  If  the  Teutonic 
word  loos  was  sometimes  used  for  a 
mansus  or  manor,  as  M.  Guizot  informs 
us,  it  seems  most  probable  that  this  wai 
a  literal  translation  of  sors,  bearing  with 
it  the  secondary  sense. 

3  Leg.  Salicae,  c.  62. 


Fkitdai,  System.       ALODIAL  AND   SALIC  LANDS. 


151 


other  means,  though  equally  bound  to  the  public  defence, 
were  relieved  from  the  severity  of  this  rule,  and  presumed 
not  to  belong  to  the  class  of  Salic.1  Hence,  in  the  Ripuary 
law,  the  code  of  a  tribe  of  Franks  settled  upon  the  banks  of 
the  Rhine,  and  differing  rather  in  words  than  in  substance 
from  the  Salic  law,  which  it  serves  to  illustrate,  it  is  said  that 
a  woman  cannot  inherit  her  grandfather's  estate  (hasreditas 
aviatica),  distinguishing  such  family  property  from  what  the 
father  might  have  acquired.2  And  Marculfus  uses  expressions 
to  the  same  effect.  There  existed,  however,  a  right  of  setting 
aside  the  law,  and  admitting  females  to  succession  by  testa- 
ment. It  is  rather  probable,  from  some  passages  in  the 
Burgundian  code,  that  even  the  lands  of  partition  (sortes 
Burgundionum)  were  not  restricted  to  male  heirs.3     And  the 


i  By  the  German  customs,  women, 
though  treated  with  much  respect  and 
delicacy,  were  not  endowed  at  their 
marriage.  Dotem  non  uxor  marito,  sed 
maritus  uxori  confert.  Tacitus,  c.  18. 
A  similar  principle  might  debar  them  of 
inheritance  in  fixed  possessions.  Certain 
it  is  that  the  exclusion  of  females  was 
not  uufrequent  among  the  Teutonic 
nations.  We  find  it  in  the  laws  of  the 
Thuringians  and  of  the  Saxons  ;  both 
ancient  codes,  though  not  free  from  in- 
terpolation. Leibnitz,  Scriptores  Reruni 
Brunswicensium,  t.  i.  p.  81  and  83. 
But  this  usage  was  repugnant  to  the 
principles  of  Roman  law,  which  the 
Franks  found  prevailing  in  their  new 
country,  and  to  the  natural  feeling  which 
leads  a  man  to  prefer  his  own  descend- 
ants to  collateral  heirs.  One  of  the  pre- 
cedents in  Marculfus  (1.  ii.  form.  12)  calls 
the  exclusion  of  females,  diuturna  et 
impia  consuetudo.  Iu  another  a  father 
addresses  his  daughter :  Omnibus  non 
habetur  incognitum,  quod,  sicut  lex 
Salica  continet,  de  rebus  meis,  quod  rnihi 
ex  alode  parentum  meorum  obcenit,  apud 
germanos  tuos  filios  meos  minime  in  hae- 
reditate  succedere  poteras.  Formulas 
Marculfo  adjectae,  49.  These  precedents 
are  supposed  to  have  been  compiled  about 
the  latter  end  of  the  seventh  century. 

The  opinion  expressed  in  the  text,  that 
the  terra  Salica,  which  females  could  not 
inherit,  was  the  land  acquired  by  the 
barbarians  on  their  first  conquest,  is  con- 
firmed by  Sismondi  (i.  196)  and  by  Gui- 
zot  (Essais  sur  l'llist.  de  France,  p.  94). 
M.  Guerard,  however,  the  learned  editor 
of  the  chartulary  of  Chartres  (Documeus 
Inedits,  1840,  p.  22),  is  persuaded  that 
Salic  land  was  that  of  the  domain,  from 
tala,  the  hall  or  principal  residence    as 


opposed  to  the  portion  of  the  estate 
which  was  occupied  by  tenants,  benefici- 
ary or  servile.  This,  he  says,  he  has 
proved  in  another  work,  which  I  have 
not  seen.  Till  I  have  done  so,  much 
doubt  remains  to  me  as  to  this  explana- 
tion. Montesquieu  had  already  started 
the  same  fheory,  which  Guizot  justly,  as 
it  seems,  jails  "  incomplete  et  hypothe- 
tique."  Besides  other  objections,  it 
seems  not  to  explain  the  manifest  iden- 
tity between  the  terra  Salica  and  the 
hcereditas  aviatica  of  the  Ripuarian  law, 
or  the  alod is  parentum  of  Marculfus.  I 
ought,  however,  to  mention  a  remark  of 
Grimm,  that,  throughout  the  Frank 
domination,  German  countries  made  use 
of  the  words  terra  Salica.  In  them  it 
could  not  mean  lands  of  partition  or 
assignment,  but  mere  alodia.  And  he 
thinks  that  it  may,  in  most  cases,  be  in- 
terpreted of  the  terra  dominicalis.  (Deut- 
sche Rechts  Alterth'umer,  p.  493.) 

M.  Fauriel  maintains  (Hist,  de  la  Gaule 
Meridion.  ii.  18)  that  the  Salic  lands 
were  beneficiary,  as  opposed  to  the  alo- 
dial. But  the  ** haereditas  aviatica"  is 
repugnant  to  this.  Marculfus  distinctly 
opposes  alodia  to  comparata,  and  limits 
the  exclusion  of  daughters  to  the  former 
According  to  one  of  the  most  recent  in- 
quirers, "terra  Salica'*  was  all  the  land 
held  by  a  Salian  Frank  (Lehuerou  i.  86). 
But  the  same  objections  apply  to  this  so- 
lution ;  in  addition  to  which  it  may  be 
said  that  the  whole  Salic  law  relates  to 
that  people,  while  "  terra  Salica  "  ia 
plainly  descriptive  of  a  peculiar  charac- 
ter of  lands. 

-  C.  56. 

3  I  had  in  former  editions  asserted  th« 
contrary  of  this,  on  the  authority  of  Leg. 
Burgund.  c.  78.  which  seemed  to  limil 


152 


ROMAN  NATIVES  OF  GAUL.    Chap.  J  I.    Par*  i 


Visigoths  admitted  women  on  equal  term?  to  the  whole 
inheritance.1 

A  controversy  has  been  maintained  in  France  as  to  the 
condition  of  the  Romans,  or  rather  tlnj  provincial 

Roman  .  .  *»/-<«       i        r  1        •  •  /»  s*n 

natives  of  inhabitants  or  Gaul,  atter  the  invasion  ot  Clovis. 
Gaul"  But  neither  those  who  have  considered  the  Franks 

as  barbarian  conquerors,  enslaving  the  former  possessors,  nor 
the  Abbe  Dubos,  in  whose  theory  they  appear  as  allies  and 
friendly  inmates,  are  warranted  by  historical  facts,  though 
more  approximation  to  the  truth  may  be  found  in  the  latter 
hypothesis.  On  the  one  hand,  we  find  the  Romans  not  only 
possessed  of  property,  and  governed  by  their  own  laws,  but 
admitted  to  the  royal  favor  and  the  highest  offices ; 2  while  the 
bishops  and  clergy,  who  were  generally  of  that  nation,3  grew 
up  continually  in  popular  estimation,  in  riches,  and  in  temporal 
sway.     Yet  it  is  undeniable  that  a  marked  line  was  drawn 


the  succession  of  estates,  called  sortes,  to 
male  heirs.  But  the  expressions  are  too 
obscure  to  warrant  this  inference;  and 
M.  Guizot  (Essais  sur  Tllist.  de  France, 
vol.  i.  p.  95)  refers  to  the  14th  chapter 
of  the  same  code  for  the  opposite  propo- 
sition. But  this,  too,  is  not  absolutely 
clear,  as  a  general  rule. 

i  [Note  III.] 

2  Daniel  conjectures  that  Clotaire  I. 
was  the  first  who  admitted  Romans  into 
the  army,  which  had  previously  been 
composed  of  Franks.  From  this  time  we 
find  many  in  high  military  command. 
(Hist,  de  la  Milice  Francoise,  t.  i.  p.  11.) 
It  seems  by  a  passage  in  Gregory  of 
Tours,  quoted  by  Dubos  (  t.  iii.  p. 
547),  that  some  Romans  affected  the  bar- 
barian character  by  letting  their  hair 
grow.  If  this  were  generally  permitted, 
it  would  be  a  stronger  evidence  of  ap- 
proximation between  the  two  races  than 
any  that  Dubos  lias  adduced.  Montes- 
quieu certainly  takes  it -for  granted  that 
a  Roman  might  change  his  law.  and  thus 
become  to  all  niatei*ial  intents  a  Frank. 
(Esprit  des  Loix,  1.  xxviii.  c.  4.)  But  the 
passage  on  which  he  relies  is  read  differ- 
ently in  the  manuscripts.     [Note  IV.  | 

8  The  barbarians  by  degrees,  got  hold 
of  bishoprics.  In  a  list  of  thirty-four 
bishops  or  priests,  present  at  a  council 
in  506.  says  M.  Fauriel  (iii.  459),  the 
names  are  all  Roman  or  Greek.  This 
was  at  Agde.  in  the  dominion  of  the  Vis- 
igoths. In  511  a  council  at  Orleans  ex- 
hibits one  German  name.  But  at  the 
fifth  council  of  Paris,  in  577,  where  for- 
ty-five bishops  attended,  the  Romans  are 
indeed   much  the  more  numerous,  but 


mingled  with  barbaric  names,  six  of 
whom  M.  Thierry  mentions.  (Reeits  des 
Temps  Merovingiens,  vol.  ii.  p.  183.)  In 
585,  at  Macon,  out  of  sixty-three  names 
but  six  are  German.  Fauriel  asserts 
that,  in  a  diploma  of  Clovis  II.  dated 
653,  there  are  but  five  Roman  names  out 
of  forty -five  witnesses  ;  and  hence  he  in- 
fers that,  by  this  time,  the  Franks  had 
seized  on  the  Church  as  their  spoil,  fill- 
ing it  with  barbai'ian  prelates.  But  on 
reference  to  Rec.  des  Hist.  (iv.  636),  I 
find  but  four  of  the  witnesses  to  this  in- 
strument qualified  as  episcopus:  and  of 
these  two  have  Roman  names.  The  ma- 
jority may  have  been  laymen  for  any  ev- 
idence which  the  diploma  presents.  In 
one.  however,  of  Clovis  III.,  dated  693 
id.  p.  672),  I  find,  among  twelve  bishops, 
only  three  names  which  appear  Roman. 
We  cannot  always  judge  by  the  modern- 
ization of  a  proper  name.  St.  Leger 
sounds  well  enough;  but  in  his  Life  we 
find  a  •'  Beatus  Leodegarius  ex  progeni* 
celsa  Francorum  ac  nobilissima  exortus.* 
Greek  names  are  exceedingly  common 
anion.'  tiie  bishops :  but  these  cannot 
mislead  an  attentive  reader. 

This  inroad  of  Franks  into  the  Church 
probably  accelerated  the  utter  prostration 
of  intellectual  power,  at  least  in  its  liter- 
al-;, manifestation, which  throws  sodark 
a  shade  over  the  seventh  century.  And 
it  still  more  unquestionably  tended  to 
the  secular,  the  irregular,  the  warlike 
character  of  the  higher  clergy  in  France 
and  Germany  for  many  following  centu- 
ries. Some  of  these  bishops,  according 
to  Gregory  of  Tours,  were  pn+lligate  bar- 
barians. 


Feudal  System.         DISTINCTION  OF   LAWS.  153 

at  the  outset  between  the  conquerors  and  tht  conquered. 
Though  one  class  of  Romans  retained  estates  of  their  own, 
yet  there  was  another,  called  tributary,  who  seem  to  have 
cultivated  those  of  the  Franks,  and  were  scarcely  raised  above 
the  condition  of  predial  servitude.  But  no  distinction  can  be 
more  unequivocal  than  that  which  was  established  between 
the  two  nations,  in  the  weregild,  or  composition  for  homicide. 
Capital  punishment  for  murder  was  contrary  to  the  spirit 
o*"  the  Franks,  who,  like  most  barbarous  nations,  would  have 
thought  the  loss  of  one  citizen  ill  repaired  by  that  of  another. 
The  weregild  was  paid  to  the  relations  of  the  slain,  according 
to  a  legal  rate.  This  was  fixed  by  the  Salic  law  at  six 
hundred  solidi  for  an  Antrustion  of  the  king  ;  at  three  hun- 
dred for  a  Roman  conviva  regis  (meaning  a  man  of  sufficient 
rank  to  be  admitted  to  the  royal  table)  ; 1  at  two  hundred  for 
a  common  Frank ;  at  one  hundred  for  a  Roman  possessor 
of  lands  ;  and  at  forty-five  for  a  tributary,  or  cultivator  of 
another's  property.  In  Burgundy,  where  religion  and  length 
of  settlement  had  introduced  different  ideas,  murder  was 
punished  with  death.  But  other  personal  injuries  were 
compensated,  as  among  the  Franks,  by  a  fine,  graduated 
according  to  the  rank  and  nation  of  the  aggrieved  party.2 

The  barbarous  conquerors  of  Gaul  and  Italy  were  guided 
by  notions  very  different  from  those  of  Rome,  who   Distinction 
had  imposed  her  own  laws  upon  all  the  subjects  of  of  laws- 
her  empire.     Adhering  in  general  to  their  ancient  customs, 

1  This  phrase  was  horrowed  from  the  To  return  to  the  words  conviva  regis, 

Romans.     The  Theodosian  code  speaks  of  it  seems  not  probable  that  they  should 

those  qui  divinis  epulis  adhibentur,   et  be   limited   to  those   who  actually   had 

adorandi  principes  facultatem  antiquitus  feasted  at  the  royal  table ;  they  naturallv 

meruerunt.     Gamier.  Origine  du  Gou-  include   the  senatorial  families,  one  of 

veraenient  Francais  (in  Leber's   Collec-  whom    would   receive  that  honor  if  he 

tion  des  Meilleures  Dissertations  relatives  should  present  himself  at  court, 

a  lHistore  de  France,  1838,  vol.  v.    p.  *  Leges  Sali.-ae,  c.  43;    Leges  Burguu- 

187).      This  memoir  by  Gamier,    which  dionum,   ti".   2.      Murder   and  robbery 

obtained  a  prize  from  the  Academy  of  In-  were  made  capita]  bv  Childebert  king  of 

scriptions  in  1761,  is  a  learned  disquisi-  Pari&j  but  Fruncus  was  to   be  sent  f  jr 

tion  on  the  relation  between  the  Frank  trial  in  the  roval  court,  debilwr  persona 

monarchy  and  the  usages  of  the  Roman  in   loco  pendamr.    Baluz,  t.  i.  p.  17.     I 

empire;    inclining  considerably    to    the  am     inclined    to    think    that    the    word 

school  of  Dubos.     I  only  read  it  in  1851 :  Francus  does  n»r   absolutely  refer  to  the 

it  puts  some  things  iu  a  just  light;  yet  nation  of  the   party,  but   rather   to  his 

the  impression  winch  it  leaves  is  that  of  rank,   as   opposed    to   debtiior   persona  ; 

one-sidedness.     The  author  does  not  ac-  and  consequently,   that   it  had  already 

count  for  the  continued  distinction  be-  acquired  the  sense  of freeman  acfree-born 

tween  the  Franks  and  Romans,  testified  (ingenuus),  which  is    perhaps  its  strict 

by  the  language  of  history  and  of  law.  meaning.       Du    Cange,    voc.    Francu». 

Gamier  never  once  alludes  to  the  most  quoces  the  passage  in  this  sense.     [Note 

striking  circumstance,  the  inequality  of  Iv.] 
imposition  for  homicide. 


154  DISTINCTION  OF   LAWS.  Chap  II.  Paut  I 

without  desire  of  improvement,  they  left  the  former  habita- 
tions in  unmolested  enjoyment  of  their  civil  institutions.  The 
Frank  was  judged  by  the  Salie  or  the  Ripuary  code;  the 
Gaul  followed  that  of  Theodosius.1  This  grand  distinction  of 
Roman  and  barbarian,  according  to  the  law  which  each  fol- 
lowed, was  common  to  the  Frank,  Burgundian,  and  Lombard 
kino-doms.  But  the  Ostrogoths,  whose  settlement  in  the  em- 
pire  and  advance  in  civility  of  manners  were  earlier,  inclined 
to  desert  their  old  usages,  and  adopt  the  Roman  jurispru- 
dence.2 The  laws  of  the  Visigoth-,  too,  were  compiled  by 
bishops  upon  a  Roman  foundation,  and  designed  as  an  uniform 
code,  by  which  both  nations  should  be  governed.8  The  name 
of  Gaul  or  Roman  was  not  entirely  lost  in  that  of  French 
man,  nor  had  the  separation  of  their  laws  ceased,  even  in  the 
provinces  north  of  the  Loire,  till  after  the  time  of  Charle- 
magne.4 Ultimately,  however,  the  feudal  customs  of  succes- 
sion, which  depended  upon  principles  quite  remote  from  those 
of  the  civil  law,  and  the  rights  of  territorial  justice  which  the 
barons  came  to  possess,  contributed  to  extirpate  the  Roman 
jurisprudence  in  that  part  of  France.  But  in  the  south,  from 
whatever  cause,  it  survived  the  revolutions  of  the  middle 
ages ;  and  thus  arose  a  leading  division  of  that  kingdom  into 
pays  coutumiers  and  pays  du  droit  ecrit ;  the  former  regulated 
by  a  vast  variety  of  ancient  usages,  the  latter  by  the  civil  law.6 

1  Inter  Romanos  negotia  causaruin  Ro-  north  of  France  on  account  of  the  supe- 

manis    Legibus    praecipimus   terminari.  rior  advantages,  particularly  in  point  01 

Edict.    Clotair.    1.  circ.  560.     Baluz.  Ca-  composition  for  offences,  annexed  to  the 

pitul.  t.  i.  p.  7-  Salic   law;  while   that  of  the  Visigoths 

B  Giannone,  1.  iii.  c.  2.  being  more   equal,   the   Romans   under 

3  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  i.  p.  242.  their  government  had  no  inducement  to 
Beineecius,  Hist.  Juris  German,  c.  i.  s.  quit  their  own  code.  (Esprit  des  Loix,  1 
15.  xxviii.  c.  4.)     But  it  does  not  appear  that 

4  Suger,  in  his  Life  of  Louis  VI.,  uses  the  Visigoths  had  any  peculiar  code  ol 
the  expression,  lex  Salica  (Recueil  des  laws  till  after  their  expulsion  from  the 
Historiens,  t.  xii.  p.  24);  and  I  have  kingdom  of  Toulouse.  They  then  re 
Borne  recollection  of  having  met  with  the  tained  only  a  small  strip  of  territory  ir 
like  words  in  other  writings  of  as  mod-  France,  about  Narbonne  and  Montpel 
ern  a  date.     But  I  am  not  convinced  that  Her. 

the  original  Salic  code  was  meant  by  this  However,  the  distinction    of  men  ac 

phrase,  which  may  have  been  applied  to  cording  to  their  laws  was  preserved  ftp 

the  local  feudal  customs.     The  capitula-  many    centuries,    both    in    France   ana 

ries  of  Charlemagne  are  frequently  term-  Italy.     A  judicial  proceeding  of  the  year 

ed  lex  Salica.     Many  of  these  are  copied  918,  published  by  the  historians  of  Lan- 

from  the  Theodosian  code.  guedoc  (t.    ii.   Appendix,   p.  56),   proves 

'■>  This  division   is  very  ancient,    being  that  the  Roman,  Gothic,  and  Salic  codes 

found    in    the    edict   of    Pistes,    under  were   then  kept    perfectly  separate,  and 

Ch.u-Ic-  the  l'.ald,  in  864;  where  we  read,  that  there  were  distinct  judges  for  th« 

in  illis  regionibus,  quae  legem  Komanam  three  nations.     The  Gothic  law  is  refer- 

Bequuutur.      (Recueil   des  Historiens,  t.  red  to  as  an  existing  authority  in  a  char- 

'ii.  p.  664.)      Montesquieu   think-;  that  ter  of  1070.      Idem,   t.    iii.  p.  274;    De 

the    Roman   law  fell   into   disuse   in  the  Marca.  Marca  Hispanica    p.  1159.     Wo- 


Feudal  System.      PROVINCIAL  GOVERNMENT. 


155 


The  kingdom  of  Clovis  was  divided  into  a  number  of  dis- 
tricts, each  under  the  government  of  a  count,   a   Provincial 
name  familiar  to  Roman  subjects,  by  which  they  *?£?**** 
rendered  the  graf  of  the  Germans.1     The  author-   French 
ity  of  this  officer  extended  over  all  the  inhabitants, 
as  well   Franks  as  natives.     It  was  his  duty  to  administer 
justice,  to  preserve  tranquillity,  to  collect,  the  royal  revenues, 
and  to  lead,  when  required,  the  free  proprietors  into  the  field. 
The  title  of  a  duke  implied  a  higher  dignity,  and  commonly 
gave  authority  over  several  counties.3      These  offices   were 
originally  conferred  during  pleasure ;  but  the  claim  of  a  son 
to  succeed  his  father  would  often  be  found  too  plausible  or 
too  formidable  to  be  rejected,  and  it  is  highly  probable  that, 
even  under  the  Merovingian  kings,  these  provincial  governors 
had  laid  the  foundations  of  that  independence  which  was  des 
tined  to  change  the  countenance  of  Europe.4     The  Lombard 


men  in  Italy  upon  marriage  usually 
changed  their  law  and  adopted  that  of 
their  husband,  returning  to  their  own  in 
widowhood;  but  to  this  there  are  excep- 
tions. Charters  are  found  as  late  as  the 
twelfth  century  with  the  expression,  qui 
professus  sum  lege  Longobardica  [aut] 
lege  Salica  [aut]  lege  Alcmannorum_  vi- 
vere.  But  soon  afterwards  the  distinc- 
tions were  entirely  lost,  partly  through 
the  prevalence  of  the  Roman  law,  and 
partly  through  the  multitude  of  local 
statutes  in  the  Italian  cities.  Muratori, 
Antiquitatcs  Italia?  Dissertat.  22;  Du 
Cange,  v.  Lex.  Heineccius,  Historia  Ju- 
ris Germanici,  c.  ii.  s.  51.     [Note  V.] 

i  The  word  graf  was  not  always  equiv- 
alent to  comes;  it  took  in  some  coun- 
tries, as  in  Engl  nd,  the  form  gerefa,  and 
stood  for  the  vicecomes  or  sheriff,  the 
count  or  aldermau*s  deputy.  Some  have 
derived  it  from  gran,  on  the  hypothesis 
that  the  elders  presided  in  the  German 
assemblies. 

2  Marculfi  Formulae,  1.  i.  32. 

3  Houard,  the  learned  translator  of 
Littleton  (  Anciemi  Loix  de3  Francois, 
t.  i.  p.  6),  supposes  these  titles  to  have 
been  applied  indifferently.  But  the  con- 
trary is  easily  proved,  and  especially  by 
a  line  of  Fortunatus,  quoted  by  Du  Cange 
and  others 

Qui  modo  dat  Comitis,  det  tibi  jura 
Ducis. 
The  cause  of  M.  Houard's  error  may  per- 
haps be  worth  noticing.  In  the  above- 
cited  form  of  Mareulfus,  a  precedent  (in 
law  language)  is  given  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  duke,  count,  or  patrician. 
The  matt-rial  part  being  the  same,  it  was 


only  necessary  to  fill  up  the  blanks,  as  we 
should  call  it.  by  inserting  the  proper 
designation  of  office.  It  is  expressed 
therefore,  actionem  comitates,  ducatus. 
aut  patriciatus,  in  pago  illo,  quam  ante 
rfssor  tuns  Me  usque  nunc  visus  est 
egi8se.  tibi  agendum  regendumque  com- 
missimus.  Montesquieu  has  fallen  into 
a  similar  mistake  (1.  xxx  c.  1H).  forget 
tiug  for  a  moment,  like  Houard,  that 
these  instruments  in  Marculfus  were  not 
records  of  real  transactions,  but  general 
forms  for  future  occasion. 

The  office  of  patrician  is  rather  more 
obscure.  It  seems  to  have  nearly  cor- 
responded with  what  was  afterwards  call- 
ed mayor  of  the  palace,  and  to  hava 
implied  the  command  of  all  the  royal 
forces.  Such  at  least  were  Celsus  and 
liis  successor  Mummolus  under  Goutran. 
This  is  probable  too  from  analogy.  The 
patrician  was  the  highest  officer  in  the 
Roman  empire  from  the  time  of  Constan- 
tine,and  we  know  how  much  the  Franks 
themselves,  and  still  more  their  Gaulish 
subjects,  affected  to  imitate  the  style  of 
the  imperial  court. 

This  office  was.  as  far  as  I  recollect, 
confined  to  the  kingdom  of  Burgundy; 
but  the  Franks  of  this  kingdom  may 
have  borrowed  it  from  the  Burgundians, 
as  the  latter  did  from  the  empire.  Mar- 
culfus gives  a  form  for  the  grant  of  the 
office  of  patrician,  which  seems  to  have 
differed  only  in  local  extent  of  authority 
from  that  of  a  duke  or  a  count,  which 
was  the  least  of  the  three;  as  the  same 
formula  expressing  their  functions  is 
sufficient  for  all. 

■»  That  the  office*  of  count  and  duk« 


155  TfiE  FRENCH  SUCCESSION.    Chap.  II.  Pabi  l 

dukes,  those  especially  of  Spoleto  and  Benevento,  acquired 
very  early  an  hereditary  right  of  governing  their  provinces, 
and  that  kingdom  became  a  sort  of  federal  aristocracy.1 
The  throne  of  France  was  always  filled  by  the  royal  house 
of  Meroveus.  However  complete  we  may  imagine 
succession     ^  ejertive  rjg]lts  0f  tiie  Franks,  it  is  dear  that  a 

Freucu  fundamental  law  restrained  them  to  this  family. 
Snchj  indeed,  had  been  the  monarchy  of  their  an- 
cestors the  Germans ;  such  long  continued  to  be  those  of 
Spain,  of  England,  and  perhaps  of  all  European  nations. 
The  reigning  family  was  immutable;  but  at  every  vacancy 
the  heir  awaited  the  confirmation  of  a  popular  election, 
whether  that  were  a  substantial  privilege  or  a  mere  cere- 
mony. Exceptions,  however,  to  the  lineal  succession  are 
rare  in  the  history  of  any  country,  unless  where  an  infant 
heir  was  thought  unfit  to  rule  a  nation  of  freemen.  But,  in 
fact,  it  is  vain  to  expect  a  system  of  constitutional  laws 
rigidly  observed  in  ages  of  anarchy  and  ignorance.  Those 
antiquaries  who  have  maintained  the  most  opposite  theories 
upon  such  points  are  seldom  in  want  of  particular  instances 
to  support  their  respective  conclusions."2 

were  originally  but  temporary  may   be  The   Helvetian    counts   appear  to  have 

inferred  from  several  passages  in  Gregory  been  nearly  independent  as  early  as  this 

of  Tours;  as   1.    v.  c.  37,    1.  viii.    c.    18.  period.      (Planta's  Ili.^t.  of  the  Helvetic 

But  it  seems  by  the  laws  of  the  Aleman-  Confederacy,  chap,  i.) 

ni,  c.  35,  that  the  hereditary  succession  ]  Giannone,  1.  iv.     [Note  VI.] 

of  their  dukes  was  tolerably  established  2  Hottoman  (Franco-Gallia,  c.  vi.)  and 

at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century,  Boulainvilliers  (Etat  de  la  France)  seem 

when  their  code  was  promulgated.     The  to  consider  the  crown  as  absolutely  elee- 

Bavarians  chose  their  own  dukes  out  of  tive.      The   Abbe    Vertot  (Memoires    de 

one  family,  as  is  declared  in  their  laws;  l'Acad.  des  Inscriptions,  t.iv  ) maintains 

tit.  ii.  c.  1,  and  e.  20.     (Litdebrog,  Co-  a    limited    right   of  election    within    the 

dex  Legum  Antiquarum.)    This  the  em-  reigning  family.     M.  de  Foncemagne  (t 

peror  Henry  II.  confirms:  Nonne  scitis  i.  ami  t.  viii.  of  the  same  collection)  as- 

(he  Bays),  Bajuarios  ab  initio  ducem  eli-  serfs  a  strict  hereditary  descent.     Neither 

gendi  liberam  habere  potestatem  ?     (Dit-  perhaps  sufficiently  distinguishes  acts  of 

mar,  apud  Schmidt,  Hist,  des  Alleniands,  violence  from  those  of  right,  nor  observes 

t.   ii.    p.   401.)     Indeed   the   consent   of  the  changes  in  the  French  constitution 

these   German   provincial   nations,   if  I  between  Clovis  and  Childerie  III. 

may  use  the  expression,  seems  to  have  It   would    now    be    admitted    by    the 

been  always  required,  as  in  an  independ-  majority  of  French  antiquaries,  that  thi 

ent  monarchy.     Ditmar,  a  chronicler  of  nearest  heir  would  not  have  a  strict  light 

the  tenth  century,  Bays  that  Eckard  was  to  the  throne  ;  but  if  he  were  of  full  age 

made  duke  of  Thoringia   totius   populi  and   in   lineal   descent,  his   expectation 

consensu     PfefTel,  Abrege  Chronologique  would  be  such  as  to  constitute  a  moral 

t.   i.  p.  134.       With    respect  to    Frauce,  claim  never  to  be  defeated  or  conl 

properly  so  called,  or  the   kingdoms  of  provided  no  impediment,  such  as  his  mi- 

Neustria  ami   Burgundy,  it  may   be  less  nority  or  weakness  of  mind,  stood  in  the 

easy  to  prove  the  existence  of  hereditary  way.     After  the  middle  of  the  seventh 

offices  under  the  Merovingians.     15ut  the  centurj  then  the  palace  selected 

feebleness  of  their  government  makes  it  whom  they  would.     As  it  is  still  clearer 

probable  that  so  natural  a  system  of  dis-  from  history  that  the  Carlovingian  kings 

organization  had    not   failed    to  eusue.  did  not  assume  the  crown  without  no 


Fkcual  System.  CLOVIS.  157 

Clovis  was  a  leader  of  barbarians,  who  respected  his  valoi 
and  the  rank  which  they  had  given  him,  but  were   Limited 
incapable  of  servile  feelings,  and  jealous  of  then-   authority 
common  as  well  as  individual  rights.     In  order  to 
appreciate  the  power  which  he  possessed,  it  has  been  custom- 
ary with    French   writers   to  bring  forward  the   well-known 
story  of  the  vase  of  Soissons.     When  the  plunder    vase  of 
taken  in  Clovis's  invasion  of  Gaul   was  set  out  in    Soisson8- 
this  place  for  distribution,  he  begged  for  himself  a  precious 
vessel  belonging  to  the  church  of  Rheims.     The  army  hav- 
ing expressed  their  willingness  to  consent,  "  You  shall  have 
nothing  here,"  exclaimed  a  soldier,  striking  it  with  his  battle- 
axe,  "  but  what  falls  to  your  share  by  lot."     Clovis  took  the 
vessel  without  marking  any  resentment,  but  found  an  oppor- 
tunity, next  year,  of  revenging  himself  by  the  death  of  the 
soldier.     The  whole  behavior  of  Clovis  appears  to  be  that 
of   a    barbarian    chief,    not    daring    to    withdraw    anything 
from  the  rapacity,  or  to  chastise  the  rudeness,  of  his  follow- 
ers. 

But  if  such  was  the  liberty  of  the  Franks  when  they  first 
became  conquerors  of  Gaul,  we  have  good  reason    Power  of 
to  believe  that  they  did  not  long  preserve  it.     A    the  kings 

J  Y  ,i  increases. 

people  not  very  numerous  spread  over  tne  spacious 
provinces  of  Gaul,  wherever  lands  were  assigned  to  or  seized 
by  them.  It  became  a  burden  to  attend  those  general  assem- 
blies of  the  nation  which  were  annually  convened  in  the 
month  of  March,  to  deliberate  upon  public  business,  as  well 
as  to  exhibit  a  muster  of  military  strength.  After  some 
time  it  appears  that  these  meetings  drew  together  only  the 
bishops,  and  those  invested  with  civil  offices.1     The -ancient 

election,  we  may  more  probably  suppose  says,  •'  must  have  been  deeply  implanted 

this  to  have  been  the  ancient* constitu-  when    Pepin   was   forced   to   obtain   the 

tion.     The  passages  in  Gregory  of  Tours  pope's  sanction    before   he   ventured    to 

which  look  like  a  mere  hereditary  succes-  depose  the  Merovingian  prince,  obscure 

sion  such  as,  Quatuor  Jilii  regnum  ac-  and   despised   as   he  was."     (Essais   *<in 

cipiunt  et  inter  se  aqu&  lance  dividunt,  l'BQst.  de  France,  p.  29S.)     But  surely 

do  not  exclude  a  popular  election,  which  this  is  not  to  the  point.     Childeric  111. 

he  would  consider  a  mere  formality,  and  was  a  reigning  king;   and,  besides  this, 

which  in  that  case  must  havu  been  little  the  question  is  by  no  means  as  to  the 

more.  right  of  the  Merovingian  family  to  the 

I  must  admit,  however.  thatM.  Guizot,  throne,  which  no  one  disputes,  but  as  to 

whose  authority  is  deservedly  so  high,  that  of  the  nearest  heir.     The  case  was 

prives  more  weight  to  lin'-al   inheritance     t  ie  same  with  the  sec 1  dynasty-     Tha 

than  many  others  have  done;  and  con-  Franks  bound  themselves  to  the  family 

sequently  treats  the  phrases  of  historians  of  Pepin,  not  to  any  one  heir  within  it. 

seeming  to  imply  a  choice  by  the  people  >  Dubos,  t.  iu.  p.  327  ;  Mably.  Observ 

as  merely  recognitions  of  a  legal  l-ight.  sur  l'Histoire  de  France,  1.  i.  c.  3 

The  principle  of  hereditary  right."  he 


158  POWER   OF  THE  KINGS.         (hap.  II.  Pakt  I 

Inhabitants  of  Gaul,  having  little  notion  of  political  liberty, 
were  unlikely  to  resist  the  most  tyrannical  conduct.  Many 
of  them  became  officers  of  state,  and  advisers  of  the  sover- 
eign, whose  ingenuity  might  teach  maxims  of  despotism  un- 
known in  [he  forests  of  Germany.  We  shall  scarcely  wrong 
the  bishops  by  suspecting  them  of  more  pliable  courtliness 
than  was  natural  to  the  long-haired  warriors  of  Clovis.1  Yet 
it  is  probable  that  some  of  the  Franks  were  themselves  in- 
strumental in  this  change  of  their  government.  The  court 
of  the  Merovingian  kings  was  crowded  with  followers,  who 
have  been  plausibly  derived  from  those  of  the  German  chiefs 
described  by  Tacitus ;  men  forming  a  distinct  and  elevated 
class  in  the  state,  and  known  by  the  titles  of  Fideles,  Leudes, 
and  Antrustiones.  They  took  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  king, 
upon  their  admission  into  that  rank,  and  were  commonly 
remunerated  with  gifts  of  land.  Under  different  appellations 
we  find,  as  some  antiquaries  think,  this  class  of  courtiers  in 
the  early  records  of  Lombardy  and  England.  The  general 
name  of  Vassals  (from  Gkvas,  a  Celtic  word  for  a  servant)  is 
applied  to  them  in  every  country.2  By  the  assistance  of 
these  faithful  supporters,  it  has  been  thought  that  the  regal 
authority  of  Clovis's  successors  was  insured.3  However  this 
may  be,  the  annals  of  his  more  immediate  descendants  ex- 
hibit a  course  of  oppression,  not  merely  displayed,  as  will 
often  happen  among  uncivilized  people,  though  free,  in 
acts  of  private  injustice,  but  in  such  general  tyranny  as  is 
incompatible  with  the  existence  of  any  real  checks  upon  the 
sovereign.4 

But  before  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century  the  kings  01 

1  Gregory  of  Tours,  throughout  his  by  being  vassals  or  servants,  became  the 
history,  talks  of  the  royal  power  in  the  object  of  beneficiary  donations.  In  on* 
tone  of  Louis  XIV. 's  court.  If  we  were  of  Marculfus's  precedents,  1.  i.  f.  18.  we 
obliged  to  believe  all  we  rend,  even  the  have  the  form  by  which  an  Antrustion 
vase  of  Soissons  would  bear  witness  to  was  created.  See  du  Cange,  under  these 
the  obedience  of  the  Franks.  several  words,  and  Muratori's  thirteenth 

2  The  Gasindi  of  Italy  and  the  Anglo-  dissertation  on  Italian  Antiquities.  The 
Saxon  royal  Thane  appear  to  correspond,  Gardingi  sometimes  mentioned  in  the 
more  or  less,  to  the  Antrustions  of  France,  laws  of  the  Visigoths  do  not  appear  to  be 
The  word  Thane,   however,  as  will  be  of  the  same  description. 

seen  in  another  chapter,  was  used  in  a  8  Boantus  .  .  .   vallatus  in  domo  sua, 

very  extensive  sense,  and  comprehended  ab  hominibus  regis  in terfectns  est.  Greg 

all   free   proprietors   of   land.      That  of  Tur.  1.  viii.  e.  11.     A  few  spirited  retain 

Leudes  seems  to  imply  only  subjection,  ers  were  sufficient   to  execute  the  man- 

and  is  frequently  applied  to  the  whole  dates  of  arbitrary  power  among  a  barbai- 

body  of  a  nation,  as  well  as,  in  a  stricter  ous  disunited  people, 

sense,   to    the    king's  personal  vassals.  *  This  is  more  fully  discussvd  in  Not! 

This  name  they  did  not  acquire,  origin-  VII. 
*Uj"»  by  possessing  benefices  ;  but  rather, 


Feudal  System.  MAYORS   OF  THE  PALACE.  159 

this  line  had  fallen  into  that  contemptible  state  Dea.enerac, 
which  has  been  described  in  the  last  chapter,  of  The  royal 
The  majors  of  the  palace,  who  from  mere  officers  Mayora  of 
of  the  court  had  now  become  masters  of  the  king-  the  palace. 
dom,  were  elected  by  the  Franks,  not  indeed  the  whole  body 
of  that  nation,  but  the  provincial  governors  and  considerable 
proprietors  of  land.1  Some  inequality  there  probably  existed 
from  the  beginning  in  the  partition  of  estates,  and  this  had 
been  greatly  increased  by  the  common  changes  of  property, 
by  the  rapine  of  those  savage  times,  and  by  royal  munifi- 
cence. Thus  arose  that  landed  aristocracy  which  became  the 
most  striking  feature  in  the  political  system  of  Europe  dur- 
ing many  centuries,  and  is,  in  fact,  its  great  distinction,  both 
from  the  despotism  of  Asia,  and  the  equality  of  republican 
governments. 

There  has  been  some  dispute  about  the  origin  of  nobility 
in  France,  which  might  perhaps  be  settled,  or  at 
least  better  understood,  by  fixing  our  conception  of 
the  term.     In  our  modern  acceptation  it  is  usually  taken  to 
imply  certain    distinctive  privileges   in   the   political  order, 
inherent  in  the  blood  of  the  possessor,  and  consequently  not 
transferable  like  those  which  property  confers.     Limited  to 
this  sense,  nobility,  I  conceive,  was  unknown   to   the  con- 
querors of  Gaul  till  long  after  the  downfall  of  the  Roman 
empire.     They  felt,  no  doubt,  the  common  prejudice  of  man 
kind  in  favor  of  those  whose  ancestry  is  conspicuous,  when 
compared  with  persons  of  obscure  birth.     This  is  the  pri- 
mary meaning  of  nobility,  and  perfectly  distinguishable  from 
the  possession  of   exclusive   civil   rights.     Those  who  are 

1  The  revolution  which  ruined  Brune-  It  might  even  he  surmised  that  the 
haut  was  brought  about  by  the  defection  crown  was  considered  as  more  elective 
of  her  chief  nobles,  especially  Warnachar,  than  before.  The  author  of  Gesta  Kegum 
mayor  of  Austrasia.  Upon  Clotaire  II. 's  Francorum,  an  old  chronicler  who  lived 
victory  over  her  he  was  compelled  to  re-  in  those  times,  changes  his  form  of  ex- 
ward  these  adherents  at  the  expense  of  pressing  a  king's  accession  from  that  of 
the  monarchy.  Warnachar  was  made  Clotaire  II.  Of  the  earlier  kings  he  says 
mayor  of  Burgundy,  with  an  oath  from  only,  regnum  recepit.  But  of  Clotaire, 
the  king  never  to  dispossess  him  (Frede-  Franci  qnoque  prsedictum  Clotairiurn 
garius,  c.  42.)  In  626  the  nobility  of  regeni  parvulum  supra  se  in  regnum  sta- 
Burguudy  declined  to  elect  a  mayor,  tuerunt.  Again,  of  the  accession  of 
which  seems  to  have  been  considered  as  Dagobert  I. :  Austrasii  Franci  superioreR, 
their  right.  From  this  time  nothing  was  congregati  in  unum,  Dagobertum  supra 
done  without  the  consent  of  the  aristoc-  se  in  regnum  statuunt.  In  anothei, 
racy.  Unless  we  ascribe  all  to  the  dif-  place,  Decedente  praefato  rege  Clodoveo, 
ferent  ways  of  thinking  in  Gregory  and  Franci  Clotairiuin  seniorem  pueruin  ex 
Fredegarius,  the  one  a  Roman  bishop,  tribus  sibi  regem  statuerunt.  Several 
the  other  a  Frank  or  Burgundian,  the  other  instances  might  be  quoted, 
government  was  altogether  changed. 


160  THE  NOBILITY.  Chap.  II.  Paw  j 

acquainted  with  the  constitution  of  the  Roman  republic  will 
recollect  an  instance  of  the  difference  between  these  two 
species  of  hereditary  distinction,  in  the  patricii  and  the 
nobiles.  Though  I  do  not  think  that  the  tribes  of  German 
origin  paid  so  much  regard  to  genealogy  as  some  Scandinavian 
and  Celtic  nations  (el^e  the  beginning- of  the  greatest  houses 
would  not  have  been  so  enveloped  in  doubt  as  we  find  them), 
there  are  abundant  traces  of  the  respeel  in  which  families 
of  known  antiquity  were  held  among  them.1 

But  the  essential  distinction  of  ranks  in  France,  perhaps 
also  in  Spain  and  Lombardy,  was  founded  upon  the  posses- 
sion of  land,  or  upon  civil  employment.  The  aristocracy  of 
wealth  preceded  that  of  birth,  which  indeed  is  still  chiefly 
dependent  upon  the  other  for  its  importance.  A  Frank  of 
large  estate  was  styled  a  noble ;  if  he  wasted  or  was 
despoiled  of  his  wealth,  his  descendants  fell  into  the  mass  of 
the  people,  and  the  new  possessor  became  noble  in  his  stead. 
Families  were  noble  by  descent,  because  they  were  rich  by 
the  same  means.  Wealth  gave  them  power,  and  power  gave 
them  preeminence.  But  no  distinction  was  made  by  the 
Salic  or  Lombard  codes  in  the  composition  for  homicide,  the 
great  test  of  political  station,  except  in  favor  of  the  king's 
vassals.  It  seem-,  however,  by  some  of  the  barbaric  codes, 
those  namely  of  the  Burgundians,  Visigoths.  Saxons,  and 
the  English  colony  of  the  latter  nation,2  that  the  free  men 
were  ranged  by  them  into  two  or  three  classes,  and  a  differ- 
f nee  made  in  the  price  at  which  their  lives  were  valued :  so 
that  there  certainly  existed  the  elements  of  aristocratic  privi- 
leges, if  we  cannot  in  strictness  admit  their  completion  at  so 
early  a  period.  The  Antrustions  of  the  kings  of  the  Franks 
were  also  noble,  and  a  composition  was  paid  for  their  mur- 
der, treble  of   that  for  an  ordinary  citizen ;  but  this  was  a 

1  The   antiquity  of  French  nobility  is  bishops.      (Mareulfi   Formulas,  1.  i.  c.  4, 

maintained  temperately  by  Schmidt.  Hist,  cuin    notis  Bignonii.  in   Balnzii  Capitu- 

des   Aliemands,    t.  i.   p.    361,  and  with  laribus.)      It    was  probably  much  con 

acrimony   by   Montesquieu.   Esprit    des  sidered   in   conferring  dignities.     Frede- 

Loix,   1.   xxx.  c.   25.     Neither   of  them  gar i us  says   of  Proiadius,  mayor  of  the 

proves  any  more  than  I  have  admitted,  palace  to  Brunehaut,  Quoscunque  genera 

The  expression  of  Ludovicus  Pins  to  bis  nobiles  reperiebat,  totos  humiliare  cona- 

freedman,    Rex   fecit    te    liberum,   non  batur,  utnullusreperiretur,  quigradum, 

nobilem  ;  quod  impossibile  est  post  liber  quem    arripuerat,   potuisset    assumere 

tatem,  is  very  intelligible,  without  imag-  [Notb  VIII.] 

Ining  a  privileged  class.     Of  the  practi  2Leg.  Burgund.  tit.  26;  Leg.  Visigoth, 

cal    regard   paid  to  birth,  indeed,  tin-re  1.  ii.  t.  2.  c.4  (in  Lindebrog.);  Du  Cange. 

an  many  proofs.    It  seems  to  have  been  voc.   Adalingus,  nobiUs ;    Wilkins,   Ijeg 

a,    recommendation    in     the    choice    of  Aug.  Sax.  passim 


Feudal  System.       FISCAL  LANDS— BENEFICES.  161 

personal,  not  an  hereditary  distinction.  A  link  was  wanting 
to  connect,  their  eminent  privileges  with  their  posterity ;  anrl 
this  link  was  to  be  supplied  by  hereditary  benefices. 

Besides  the  lands  distributed  among  the  nation,  others 
were  reserved  to  the  crown,  partly  for  the  support  Fiscal 
of  its  dignity,  and  partly  for  the  exercise  of  its  lands- 
munificence.  These  are  called  fiscal  lands ;  they  were  dis- 
persed over  different  parts  of  the  kingdom,  and  formed  the 
most  regular  source  of  revenue.1  But  the  greater  portion 
of  them  were  granted  out  to  favored  subjects,  under  the 
name  of  benefices,  the  nature  of  which  is  one  of  the  most 
important  points  in  the  policy  of  these  ages.  Benefices 
were,  it  is  probable,  most  frequently  bestowed  upon 
the  professed  courtiers,  the  Antrustiones  or  Leudes, 
and  upon  the  provincial  governors.  It  by  no  means  appears 
that  any  conditions  of  military  service  were  expressly 
annexed  to  these  grants :  but  it  may  justly  be  presumed  that 
such  favors  were  not  conferred  without  an  expectation  of 
some  return ;  and  we  read  both  in  law  and  history  that  bene- 
ficiary tenants  were  more  closely  connected  with  the  crown 
than  mere  alodial  proprietors.  Whoever  possessed  a  bene- 
fice was  expected  to  serve  his  sovereign  in  the  field.  But  of 
alodial  proprietors  only  the  owner  of  three  mansi  was  called 
upon  for  personal  service.  Where  there  were  three  posses- 
sors of  single  mansi,  one  went  to  the  army,  and  the  others 
contributed  to  his  equipment.2  Such  at  least  were  the  regu- 
lations of  Charlemagne,  whom  I  cannot  believe,  with  Mably, 
to  have  relaxed  the  obligations  of  military  attendance. 
After  the  peace  of  Coblentz,  in  860,  Charles  the  Bald 
restored  all  alodial  property  belonging  to  his  subjects,  who 
had  taken  part  again-t  him,  but  not  his  own  beneficiary 
grants,  which  they  were  considered  as  having  forfeited. 

Most  of  those  who  have  written   upon   the  feudal  system 
lay  it  down  that  benefices  were  originally  precari-   Their 
ous  and  revoked  at  pleasure  by  the  sovereign  ;  •  that   extent- 

l  The  demesne  lands  of  the  crown  are  I   cannot   define    the   precise  area  of  a 

continually  mentioned  in  the  early  writ-  mansus.     It  consisted,  according  to  Du 

ers  ;  the  kings,  in  journeying  to  differ-  Cange,  of    twelve  jugera;  but  what   he 

ent   parts   of  their   dominions,  took    up  meant  by  a  juger  I  know  not.     The  an- 

their  abode   in    them.     Charlemagne   is  cient  Roman  juger  was  about  five  eighths 

very  full   in    Ids    directions   as  to  their  of  an   acre  ;  the  Parisian  arpent  was  a 

management.      Capitularia,   a.d.  797,  et  fourth     more    than    one.      This   wouH 

alibi,  make  a  difference  as  two  to  one 

2Capitul.  Car.  Mag.  aim.  807  and  812. 

VOL.  I.  — M.  11 


1G2  EXTEN1    01    BENEFICES.       Chap.  II.  Pabt  1 

they  were  afterwards  granted  for  life;  and  at  a  subsequent 
period  became  hereditary.  No  satisfactory  proof,  however 
appears  to  have  beeu  brought  of  the  first  Btage  in  this  prog- 
ress.1 At  least,  I  am  not  convinced  that  beneficiary  grants 
were  ever  considered  as  resumable  at  pleasure,  unless  where 
some  delinquency  could  be  imputed  to  the  vassal.  It  is  pos- 
sible, though  1  am  not  aware  of  any  document-  which  prove 
it,  that  benefices  may  in  some  instances  have  been  granted 
for  a  term  of  years;  since  even  fiefs  in  much  later  times  were 
occasionally  of  no  greater  extent.  Their  ordinary  duration, 
however,  was  at  least  the  life  of  the  possessor,  after  which 
they  reverted  to  the  ii.-c.'2  Nor  can  I  agree  with  those  who 
deny  the  existence  of  hereditary  benefices  under  the  fir.-: 
race  of  French  kings.  The  codes  of  the  Burgundians,  and 
of  the  Visigoths,  which  advert  to  them,  are,  by  analogy,  wit- 
nesses to  the  contrary.3  The  precedents  given  in  the  forms 
of  Marculfus  (about  660)  for  the  grant  of  a  benefice,  contain 
very  full  terms,  extending  it  to  the  heirs  of  the  beneficiary.4 
And  Mably  has  plausibly  inferred  the  perpetuity  of  bene- 
fices, at  lea-t  in  >ome  instances,  from  the  language  of  the 
treaty  at  Andely  in  587,  and  of  an  edict  of  Clotaire  II.  some 
years  later.5  We  can  hardly  doubt  at  least  that  children 
would  put  in  a  very  strong  claim  to  what  their  father  had 
enjoyed ;    and  the   weakness  of  the    crown  in  the  seventh 

i [Note  IX.]  one  John,  in  795.     Baluzii   Capitularia 

2  The  following  passage  from  Gregory      t.  ii.  p.  1400. 

of  Tours  Beems  to  prove  that,  although  5  Quicquid  antefati  reges  ecclesiis  aut 

sons  were  occasionally  permitted  to  sue-  fidelibus   suis   contulerunt,   aut  adhuc 

ceed  their  lathers,  an  indulgence  which  conferre   cum    justitia  Deo   propitiante 

easily  grew   up  into  a  right,  the  crown  voluerint.  stabiliterconservetur ;  etquic- 

had,  in  his  time,  an  unquestionable  re-  quid  unicuique    fidelium  in   utriusque 

version  after  the  death  of  its  origiual  regno  per  legem  et  justitiam  redhibetur, 

beneficiary.      Hoe    tempore   et     Wande-  nullum    ei    prejudicium     ponatur,    sed 

liuus,  nutritor  Childeberti  regis  obiit;  sed  liceat  res   debitas  possidere  atque  reci 

in  locum  ejus    nullus  est  subrogatus,  eo  pere.     Et  si  aliquid   unicuique    per  in 

quod  regina  mater  curam  velit  propriam  terregna     sine    culpa     sublatuni     est, 

habere   de   filio.        Qua:cunque   de  Jisco  audientiu  habita  restauretur.     Et  de  eo 

meruit,  fisci  jtaibus  sunt  relata.    Obiit  quod    per  munificentias   pracedentium 

his     diebus     Bodegesilus     dux     plenus  regum  unusquisque  usque  ad  traneitun? 

dierum;scd   nihil  de  facilitate  ejus  filiis  gloriosae      memoriae      domini     Ohlotha- 

minutum  est.  1.  viii.  c.  22.     Gregory's  charii    regis     possedit,  cum     secuiitat*- 

work,  however,  does  not  go  farther  than  possideat ;  et  quod  exinde  fidelibus  per- 

&95-                                                            ,  sonis  ablatum  est,  de  prsesenti  recipiat. 

3  Leges  Burgundiorum,  tit.  i.;  Leges  Foedus  Andeliacum,  in  Gregor.  Turon 
Visigoth.  1.  v.  tit.  2.  1.  ix.  c.  20. 

4  Marculf.  form.  xii.  and  xiv.  1.  i.  Quascunque  ecclesise  vel  clericis  vel 
This  precedent  was  in  use  down  to  the  quibuslibet  ncrsouis  a  gloriosae  memorisB 
eleventh  century  :  its  expressions  recur  praefatis  principibua  niunineeutiae  largi- 
in  almost  every  charter.  The  earliest  tate  collate  sunt,  omni  firmitate  per- 
instance  I  have  seen  of  an  actual  grant  durent.  Edict.  Chlotachar  I.  vel  potiuf 
to  a  private  person  is  of  Charlemairue  to  II.  in  Uecueil  des  Historiens,  t.if  p.  110. 


Feudal  System.  SUBINFEUDATION.  1 05 

century  must  have  rendered  it  difficult  to  reclaim  its  prop- 
erty. 

A  natural  consequence  of  hereditary  benefices  was  that  those 
who  possessed  them  carved  out  portions  to  be  held  submfeu- 
of  themselves  by  a  similar  tenure.  Abundant  proofs  dation- 
of  this  custom,  best  known  by  the  name  of  subinfeudation, 
occur  even  in  the  capitularies  of  Pepin  and  Charlemagne. 
At  a  later  period  it  became  universal ;  and  what  had  begun 
perhaps  through  ambition  or  pride  was  at  last  dictated  by 
necessity.  In  that  dissolution  of  all  law  which  ensued  after 
the  death  of  Charlemagne,  the  powerful  leaders,  constantly 
engaged  in  domestic  warfare,  placed  their  chief  dependency 
upon  men  whom  they  attached  by  gratitude,  and  bound  by 
strong  conditions.  The  oath  of  fidelity  which  they  had  taken., 
the  homage  which  they  had  paid  to  the  sovereign,  they 
exacted  from  their  own  vassals.  To  render  military  service 
became  the  essential  obligation  which  the  tenant  of  a  benefice 
undertook  ;  and  out  of  those  ancient  grants,  now  become  for 
the  most  part  hereditary,  there  grew  up  in  the  tenth  century, 
both  in  name  and  reality,  the  system  of  feudal  tenures.1 

This  revolution  was  accompanied  by  another  still  more 
important.  The  provincial  governors,  the  dukes  Usurpation 
and  counts,  to  whom  we  may  add  the  marquises  or  of  provincial 
margraves  intrusted  with  the  custody  of  the  Iron-  gov 
tiers°  had  taken  the  lead  in  all  public  measures  after  the 
decline  of  the  Merovingian  kings.  Charlemagne,  duly  jealous 
of  their  ascendancy,  checked  it  by  suffering  the  duchies  to 
expire  without  renewal,  by  granting  very  few  comities  hered- 
itarily, by  removing  the  administration  of  justice  from  the 
hands  of  the  counts  into  those  of  his  own  itinerant  judges, 
and,  if  we  are  not  deceived  in  his  policy,  by  elevating  the 
ecclesiastical  order  as  a  counterpoise  to  that  of  the  nobility. 
Even  in  his  time,  the  faults  of  the  counts  are  the  constant 
theme  of  the  capitularies;  their  dissipation  and  neglect  of 
duty,  their  oppression  of  the  poorer  proprietors,  and  their 
artful  attempts  to  appropriate  the  crown  lands  situated  within 
their  territory.2  If  Charlemagne  was  unable  to  redress  those 
evils,  how  much  must  they  have  increased  under  his  posterity! 
That  great  prince  seldom  gave  more  than  one  county  to  the 

i  [NoTE  x.]  t-  "•  P-  158 ;  Gaillard,  Vie  de  Charlem   t 

2  Capitularia   Car.   Mag.  et  Lud.  Pii.     iii.  p.  118. 
passim;  Schmiit,  Hist,   des  Allemands. 


164  CHANGE  OF  TENURES.       Chap.  11.  Part  i 

same  person  ;  and  as  they  were  generally  of  moderate  size, 
coextensive  with  episcopal  dioceses,  there  was  less  danger,  if 
this  policy  had  been  followed,  of  their  becoming  independent.1 
But  Louis  the  Debonair,  and,  in  a  still  greater  degree,  Charles 
the  Bald,  allowed  several  counties  to  be  enjoyed  by  the  same 
person.  The  possessors  constantly  aimed  at  acquiring  private 
estates  within  the  limits  of  their  charge,  and  thus  both 
rendered  themselves  formidable,  and  assumed  a  kind  of  patri 
monial  right  to  their  dignities.  By  a  capitulary  of  Charles 
the  Bald,  a.d.  877,  the  succession  of  a  son  to  the  father's 
county  appears  to  be  recognized  as  a  known  usage.'2  In  the 
next  century  there  followed  an  entire  prostration  of  the  royal 
authority,  and  the  counts  usurped  their  governments  as  little 
sovereignties,  with  the  domains  and  all  regalian  rights,  subject 
only  to  the  feudal  superiority  of  the  king.3  They  now  added 
the  name  of  the  county  to  their  own,  and  their  wives  took  the 
appellation  of  countess.4  In  Italy  the  independence  of  the 
dukes  was  still  more  complete  ;  and  although  Otho  the  Great 
and  his  descendants  kept  a  stricter  rein  over  those  of  Ger- 
many, yet  we  find  the  great  fiefs  of  their  empire,  throughout 
the  tenth  century,  granted  almost  invariably  to  the  male  and 
even  female  heirs  of  the  last  posse>.-or. 

Meanwhile,  the  alodial  proprietors,  who  had  hitherto  formed 
Change  of  the  strength  of  the  state,  fell  into  a  much  worse  con- 
feudailmt°  dition.  They  were  exposed  to  the  rapacity  of  the 
tenures.  counts,  who,  whether  as  magistrates  and  governors, 
or  as  overbearing  lords,  had  it  always  in  their  power  to  harass 
them.  Every  district  was  exposed  to  continual  hostilities  ; 
sometimes  from  a  foreign  enemy,  more  often  from  the  owners 
jf  castles  and  fastne.-ses,  which,  in  the  tenth  century,  under 
pretence  of  resisting  the  Normans  and  Hungarians,  served 
the  purposes  of  private  war.  Against  such  a  system  of  rapine 
the  military  compact  of  lord  and  vassal  was  the  only  effectual 
shield  ;  its  essence  was  the  reciprocity  of  service  and  protec- 
tion.    But  an  insulated  alodialist  had  no  support ;  his  fortunes 

1  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  i.  p.  a  It  appears,  by  the  record  of  a  process 

687,  700,  and  not.  87.  in  918,  that  the  counts  of  Toulouse  had 

s  Baluzii  Capitularia,  t.  ii.  p.  263,  269.  already  so  far  usurped  the  rights  of  their 

This  is  a  questionahle  point,  and  most  sovereign  as  to  claim  an  estate  on   th* 

French  antiquaries  consider  this  famous  ground  of  its  being  a  royal  benefice.   Ilist. 

"apiiul  in  ;i-  the  foundation  of  an  hered-  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii.  A.ppen.  p.  56 

dery  right  in  <ounties.     I  am  inclined  *  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  i.  p 

to  thi'ik  that  there  was  at  least  a  practice  588,  and  infra,  t.  ii.  p.  38,  109,  and  Ap 

Of  succession  which  is  implied  and  guar-  pendix,  p.  56. 
anteed  by  this  provisioi      [Note  VI] 


Ieudai,  System.     PERSONAL  COMMENDATION.  165 

were  strangely  changed  since  he  claimed,  at  least  in  right,  a 
share  in  the  legislation  of  his  country,  and  could  compare 
with  pride  his  patrimonial  fields  with  the  temporary  benefices 
of  the  crown.  Without  law  to  redress  his  injuries,  without 
the  royal  power  to  support  his  right,  he  had  no  course  left 
but  to  compromise  with  oppression,  and  subject  himself,  in 
return  for  protection,  to  a  feudal  lord.  During  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries  it  appears  that  alodial  lands  in  France  had 
chiefly  become  feudal :  that  is,  they  had  been  surrendered  by 
their  proprietors,  and  received  back  again  upon  the  feudal 
conditions  ;  or  more  frequently,  perhaps,"  the  owner  had  been 
compelled  to  acknowledge  himself  the  man  or  vassal  of  a 
suzerain,  and  thus  to  confess  an  original  grant  which  had 
never  existed.1  Changes  of  the  same  nature,  though  not 
perhaps  so  extensive,  or  so  distinctly  to  be  traced,  took  place 
in  Italy  and  Germany.  Yet  it  would  be.  inaccurate  to  assert 
that  the  prevalence  of  the  feudal  system  has  been  unlimited;  in 
a  great  part  of  France  alodial  tenures  always  subsisted  ;  and 
many  estates  in  the  empire  were  of  the  same  description.2 

There  are,  however,  vestiges  of  a  very  universal   custom 
distinguishable  from    the    feudal    tenure  of   land,  _ 

o  .  '  Custom  of 

though  so  analogous  to   it   that  it  seems  to  have  personal 
nearly  escaped  the  notice  of  antiquaries.     From  ct°^ e 
this  silence  of  other  writers,  and  the  great  obscu- 
rity of  the  subject,  I  am  almost  afraid  to  notice  what  several 
pas-ages  in  ancient  laws  and  instruments  concur  to  prove,  that, 
besides  the  relation  established  between  lord  and  vassal  by 

1  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii.  p.  109.  It  and,  on  the  other  hand,  in  those  of  the 
must  be  confessed  that  there  do  not  occur  teuth  and  eleventh  centuries,  the  word 
so  many  specific  instances  of  this  con-  alodium  is  continually  used  for  a  feud,  or 
version  of  alodial  tenure  into  feudal  as  hereditary  benefice,  which  renders  this 
might  be  expected,  in  order  to  warrant  subject  still  more  obscure, 
the  supposition  in  the  text.  Several  2  The  maxim,  Nulle  terre  sans  seig- 
records.  however,  are  quoted  by  Robert-  nenr.  was  so  far  from  being  universally 
son,  Hist.  Charles  V.,  note  8;  and  others  received  in  France,  that  in  almost  all 
may  be  found  in  diplomatic  collections,  southern  provinces,  or  pays  du  droit 
A  precedent  for  surrendering  alodial  eerit,  lauds  were  presumed  to  be  alodial, 
property  to  the  king,  and  receiving  it  unless  the  contrary  was  shown,  or,  as  i; 
back  as  his  benefice,  appears  even  in  was  called,  franc-aleux  sans  titre.  The 
Marcultus,  1.  i.  form  13.  The  county  of  parliaments,  however,  seem  latter ly  to 
Comiuges,  between  the  Pyrenees,  Tou-  have  inclined  against  this  presumption, 
louse,  and  Bigorre,  was  alodial  till  1244,  and  have  thrown  the  burden  of  proof 
wheu  it  was  put  under  the  feudal  protec-  on  the  party  claiming  alo  liality.  For 
tion  of  the  count  of  Toulouse.  It  de-  this  see  Denisart,  Dictionnaire  des  De- 
volved by  escheat  to  the  crown  in  1413.  cisions,  art.  Frauc-aleu.  [Note  XI.] 
Villaret,  t.  xv.  p.  346.  In  Germany,  according  to  Du  Cange 

In  many  early  charters  the  king  cod-  voc.   Baro,   there  was  a    distinction   be- 

firms  the  possession  even  of  alodial  prop-  tween  Barones  and  Semper-Barones;  the 

ertv  for  greater  security  in  lawless  times  ;  latter  holding  their  lands  alodiall) 


L66  PERSONAL  COMMENDATION.    Chai>.  II   Part  I 

beneficiary  grants,  there  was  another  species  more  personal, 
and  more  closely  resembling  that  of  patron  and  client  in  the 
Roman  republic.  This  was  usually  called  commendation; 
and  appears  to  have  been  founded  on  two  very  general  princi- 
ple.-, both  of  which  the  distracted  state  of  society  inculcated. 
The  weak  needed  the  protection  of  the  powerful  ;  and  the 
government  needed  some  security  for  public  order.  Even 
before  the  invasion  of  the  Franks,  Salvian,  a  writer  of  the 
fifth  century,  mentions  the  custom  of  obtaining  the  protection 
of  the  great  by  money,  and  blames  their  rapacity,  though  he 
allows  the  natural  reasonableness  of  the  practice.1  The  dis- 
advantageous condition  of  the  less  powerful  freemen,  which 
ended  in  the  servitude  of  one  part,  and  in  the  feudal  vassalage 
of  another,  led  such  as  fortunately  still  preserved  their  alodial 
property  to  insure  its  defence  by  a  stipulated  payment  of 
money.  Such  payments,  called  Salvamenta,  may  be  traced 
in  extant  charters,  chiefly  indeed  of  monasteries.3  In  the  case 
of  private  persons  it  may  be  presumed  that  this  voluntary 
contract  was  frequently  changed  by  the  stronger  party  into 
a  perfect  feudal  dependence.  From  this,  however,  as  I  im- 
agine, it  probably  differed,  in  being  capable  of  dissolution  at 
the  inferior's  pleasure,  without  incurring  a  forfeiture,  as  well 
as  in  having  no  relation  to  land.  Homage,  however,  seem-  to 
have  been  incident  to  commendation,  as  well  a>  to  vassalage. 
Military  service  was  sometimes  the  condition  of  this  engage- 
ment. It  was  the  law  of  France,  so  late  at  least  as  the  com- 
mencement of  the  third  race  of  kings,  that  no  man  could  take 
a  part  in  private  wars,  except  in  defence  of  his  own  lord. 
This  we  learn  from  an  historian  about  the  end  of  the  tenth 
century,  who  relates  that  one  Erminfrid,  having  been  released 
from  his  homage  to  count  Burchard,  on  ceding  the  fief  he  had 
held  of  him  to  a  monastery,  renewed  the  ceremony  on  a  war 
breaking  out  between  Burchard  and  another  nobleman,  where- 
in he  was  desirous  to  give  assistance  ;  since,  the  author  ob- 
serves, it  is  not,  nor  has  been,  the  practice  in  France,  for  any 
man  to  be  concerned  in  war,  except  in  the  presence  or  by  the 
command  of  his  lord.8  Indeed,  there  is  reason  to  infer,  from 
the  capitularies  of  Charles  the  Bald,  that  every  man  was 
bound  to  attach  himself  to  some  lord,  though  it  was  the  priv- 
ilege of  a  freeman  to  choose  his  own  superior.4     And  this  is 

1  Du  Cange   r.  Salvamentum  3Recueil  dea  Historiens,  t.  x.  p.  355. 

"TbiJ  <Unusquisque   liber  homo   post  mot' 


Feudal  System.    EDICT   OF  CONE  AD  THE  SALIC.  167 

strongly  supported  by  the  analogy  of  our  Anglo-Saxon  laws, 
where  it  is  frequently  repeated  trut  no  man  should  continue 
without  a  lord.  There  are,  too,  as  it  seems  to  me,  a  great 
number  oi  passages  in  Domesday-book  which  confirm  this 
distinction  between  personal  commendation  and  the  benefi- 
ciary tenure  of  land.  Perhaps  I  may  be  thought  to  dwell  too 
prolixly  on  this  obscure  custom ;  but  as  it  tends  to  illustrate 
those  mutua:  relations  of  lord  and  vassal  which  supplied  the 
place  of  regular  government  in  the  polity  of  Europe,  and  has 
seldom  or  never  been  explicitly  noticed,  its  introduction 
seemed  not  improper. 

It  has  been  sometimes  said  that  feuds  were  first  rendered 
hereditary  in  Germany  by  Conrad  II.,  surnamed  Edict  of 
the    Salic.      This    opinion    is    perhaps    erroneous.  thTsaiic. 
But  there  is  a  famous  edict  of  that  emperor   at 
Milan,  in  the  year  1037,  which,  though  immediately  relating 
only  to  Lombardy,  marks  the  full  maturity  of  the  system,  and 
the  last  stage  of  its  progress.1     I  have  remarked  already  the 
custom  of  subinfeudation,  or  grants  of  lands  by  vassals  to  be 
held  of  themselves,  which  had  grown  up  with  the  growth  of 
these  tenures.     There  had  occurred,  however,  some  disagree- 
ment, for  want  of  settled  usage,  between  these  inferior  vas- 
sals and  their  immediate  lords,  which  this  edict  was  expressly 
designed  to  remove.     Four  regulations  of 'great  importance 
are  established  therein :  that  no  man  should  be  deprived  of 

tern  domini  sui,  licentiarn  habeat  se  com-  The  article  Commendatio  in  Du  Cange's 

mendandi  inter  hasc  tria  regna  ad  quern-  Glossary  furnishes  some  hints  upon  this 

cunque  voluerit.      Similiter  et  ille  qui  subject,   which,    however,    that    author 

nondum  alicui  commendatus  est.  Baluzii  does  not  seem  to  have  fully  apprehended. 

Capitularia,  t.  i.  p.  443.     a.d.  806.     Vo-  Carpentier,    in   his   Supplement   to    the 

lumus  etiam  ut  unusquisque  liber  homo  Glossary,   under   the  word  Vassaticum, 

in  uostro  regno  seniorem  qualeni  voluerit  gives  the  clearest  notice  of  it  that  I  have 

in  nobis  et  in  nostris  fidelibus  recipiat.  anywhere     found.      Since    writing     the 

Capit.  Car.  Calvi,  a.d.  877.     Et  voluinus  above  pages   I   have  found   the  subject 

ut  cujuscunque  nostrum  homo,  in  cujus-  touched  by  M.  de  Montlosier,  Hist,  de  la 

cunque  regno  sit,  cum   seniore  suo   in  Monarchic  Framaise,  t.  i.  p.  854.    [Note 

hostem,  vel  aliis  suis  utilitatibus  pergat.  XI.] 

Ibid.     See  too  Baluze,  t.  i.  p.  536,  537.  1  Spelman   tells  us,  in  his  Treatise  of 

By  the  Establishments   of  St.  Louis,  Feuds,  chap,  ii.,  that  Conradus  Salicus,  a 

c.    87,  every    stranger  coming   to  settle  French  emperor,  but  of  German  descent 

within  a  barony  was  to  acknowledge  the  [what   can  this   mean  .'],  went  to   Home 

baron  as  lord  within  a  year  and  a  day,  or  about  915  to  fetch  his  crown  from  Pope 

pay  a  fine.     In  some  places  he  eveu  be-  Johu  X.    when,  according   to   him,  the 

came   the   serf   or   villein   of   the    lord,  succession  of  a  son    to  his  father's   fief 

Ordonnances  des  Rois,  p.  187.    Upon  this  was  first  conceded.     An  almost  unparal- 

jea lousy  of  unknown  settlers  which  per-  leled   blunder   in    so   learned   a   writer! 

vades  the  policy  of  the  middle  ages,  was  Conrad  the  Salic  was  elected  at  Worms  in 

founded  the  droit  d'aubaine,  or  right  to  1024,  crowned  at  Rome  by  John  XIX.  in 

their  movables  after  their  decease.    See  1027,  and  made   this  edict  at  Milan  \t 

oreface  to  Ordonnances  des  Rois.    t.  i.  1037. 
0.15. 


1G8      PRINCIPLES   OF    FEUDAL   RELATION.    Chap.  II.  Part  1 

his  fief,  whether  held  of  the  emperor  or  a  mesne  lord,  but  by 
the  laws  of  the  empire  and  the  judgment  of  his  peers;1  that 
from  such  judgment  an  Immediate  vassal  might  appeal  to  his 
sovereign;  that  fiefs  shonld  be  inherited  by  sons  and  their 
children,  or,  in  their  failure,  by  brothers,  provided  they  were 
feuda  paterna,  such  as  had  descended  from  the  father;2  mid 
that  the  lord  should  not  alienate  the  fief  of  his  vassal  with- 
out his  consent.? 

Such  was  the  progress  of  these  feudal  tenures,  which  deter- 
mined the  political  character  of  every  European  monarchy 
where  they  prevailed,  as  well  as  formed  the  foundations  of  its 
jurisprudence.  It  is  certainly  inaccurate  to  refer  this  sys- 
tem, as  is  frequently  done,  to  the  destruction  of  the  Roman 
empire  by  the  northern  nations,  though  in  the  beneficiary 
grants  of  those  conquerors  we  trace  its  beginning.  Four  or 
five  centuries,  however,  elapsed,  before  the  alodial  tenures, 
which  had  become  incomparably  the  more  general,  gave  way, 
and  before  the  reciprocal  contract  of  the  feud  attained  its 
maturity.  It  is  now  time  to  describe  the  legal  qualities  and 
effects  of  this  relation,  so  far  only  as  may  be  requisite  to  un- 
derstand its  influence  upon  the  political  system. 

The  essential  principle  of  a  fief  was  a  mutual  contract  of 
Principles  support  and  fidelity.  Whatever  obligations  it  laid 
of  a  feudal  upon  the  vassal  of  service  to  his  lord,  correspond- 
ing duties  of  protection  were  imposed  by  it  on  the 
lord  towards  his  vassal.4  If  these  were  transgressed  on  ei- 
ther side,  the  one  forfeited  his  land,  the  other  his  seigniory  or 
rights  over  it.     Nor  were  motives  of  interest  left  alone  to 

o 

i Nisi  secundum  constitutionem  ante-  tion  is  possible;   namely,  that  the  lord 

cessorum nostrorum,  et  judicium  parium  should  not   alienate   his   own  seigniory 

euorum  ;  the  very  expressions  of  Magna  without  his  vassal's  consent,  which  was 

Charta.  agreeable  to  the  feudal   tenures.     This, 

S  "  Gerardus  noteth,*'  says  Sir  II.  Spel-  indeed,  would  be  putting  rather  a  forced 

man,  "  that  this  law  settled  not  the  feud  construction   on    the  words   ne   domino 

upon  the  eldest  son,  or  any  other  son  of  feudum  militis  alienare  liceat. 

the  feudatary  particularly  ;  but  left  it  in  4  Crag.  Jus  Feudale,  1.  ii.  tit.  11.    Beau 

the  lord's  election  to  please  himself  with  manoir,  Cofitumes   de  Beauvoisis,  c.  lxi 

which  he  would."     But  the  phrase  of  the  p.  311 ;  Ass.  de  Jerus.  c.  217  ;  Lib.  Feud 

edict  runs,  filios  ejus  bencficiuin  tenere  :  I.  ii.  tit.  26,  47. 

which,  when  nothing  more  is   said,  cau  Upon  the  mutual  obligation  of  the  lord 

Only  mean  a  partition  among  the  sons.  towards  his  vassal  seems  to  be  founded 

3  The  last  provision  may  seem  strange  the  law   of  warranty,  which    compelled 

at  so  advanced   a  period  of  the  system  ;  him  to  make  indemnification  where  the 

according  to  Giannone,  feuds  were  tenant   was   evicted  of  bis   land.      This 

still  revocable  by  the  lord  in  some  parts  obligation,  however  unreasonable  it  may 

of  Lombardy.     [storia  <Ii  Napoli,  1.  xiii.  appear  to  as.  extended,  according  to  the 

c.  3      it  seems,  however,  no  more  than  feudal   lawyers,   to   cases  of   mcfre  doua- 

bad    I n   already  enacted  by  the  first  tion.     Crag.  1.  ii.  tit.   4;  Butler's  Notes 

clause  of  this  edict.    Another  interpreta-  on  Co.  Litt  p.  365. 


ffiUDAL  System.  PRINCIPLES  OF  FEUDAL  RELATION.  1  Co- 
operate in  securing  the  feudal  connection.  The  a-sociations 
founded  upon  ancient  custom  and  friendly  attachment,  the 
impulses  of  gratitude  and  honor,  the  dread  of  infamy,  the 
sanctions  of  religion,  were  all  employed  to  strengthen  these 
ties,  and  to  render  them  equally  powerful  with  the  relations 
of  nature,  and  far  more  so  than  those  of  political  society.  It 
is  a  question,  agitated  among  the  feudal  lawyers,  whether  a 
vassal  is  bound  to  follow  the  standard  of  his  lord  against  his 
own  kindred.1  It  was  one  more  important  whether  he  must 
do  so  against  the  kino-.  In  the  works  of  those  who  wrote 
when  the  feudal  system  was  declining,  or  who  were  anxious  to 
maintain  the  royal  authority,  this  is  commonly  decided  in  the 
negative.  Littleton  gives  a  form  of  homage,  with  a  reserva- 
tion  of  the  allegiance  due  to  the  sovereign  ; 2  and  the  same 
prevailed  in  Normandy  and  some  oilier  countries.3  A  law  ol 
Frederic  Barbarossa  enjoins  that  in  every  oath  of  fealty  to  an 
inferior  lord  the  vassal's  duty  to  the  emperor  should  be  ex- 
pressly reserved.  But  it  was  not  so  during  the  height  of 
the  feudal  system  in  France.  The  vassals  of  Henry  II.  and 
Richard  I.  never  hesitated  to  adhere  to  them  against  the  sov- 
ereign, nor  do  they  appear  to  have  incurred  any  blame  on 
that  account.  Even  so  late  as  the  age  of  St.  Louis,  it  is  laid 
down  in  his  Establishments,  that,  if  justice  is  refused  by  the 
king  to  one  of  his  vassals,  he  might  summon  his  own  tenants, 
under  penalty  of  forfeiting  their  fiefs,  to  assist  him  in  obtain- 
ing redress  by  arms.4  The  count  of  Britany,  Pierre  de 
Dreux,  had  practically  asserted  this  feudal  right  during  the 
minority  of  St.  Louis.  In  a  public  instrument  he  announced 
to  the  world,  that,  having  met  with  repeated  injuries  from  the 
regent,  and  denial  of  justice,  he  had  let  the  king  know  that  he 

iCrag.  1.  ii.  tit.  4.  tre  voua.     Si  la  reponse  est  que  volon- 

2  Sect,  lxxxv.  tiers   il  fera  droit  en  sa  cour,  l'homme 

SHouard,  Anc.  Loix  des   Francois,  p.  n'est  point  oblige  de  deferer  a  la  requisi- 

114.     See  too  an  instance  of  this  resei-va-  tion  du  sire  ;  niais  il  doit,  on  le  suivre, 

tion   in  Recueil    des   Historiens,    t.   xi.  ou  le  resoudre  a  perdre  son  fief,  si  le  chef 

447.  seigneur  persiste  dans  son   refus.     Eta- 

4  Si   le  sire    dit   a  son    homme  lige,  blissemens   de  St.  Louis,  c.  49.     I  hare 

Venez  vous  en  avec  moi.  je  veux  guer-  copied  this  from  Velly,  t.  vi.  p.  213.  who 

royer   mon   seigneur,   qui    me   deuie   le  has  modernized  the  orthography,  which 

'ugement  de  sa  cour,  le  yassal  doit  re-  is  almost  unintelligible  in  the  Ordonnan- 

pondre,  J*irai  scavoir  s*il  est  ainsi  que  ces  des  Kois.     One  MS.  gives  the  reading 

vous  me  dites.     Alors  il  doit  aller  trou-  Rui  instead  of   Seigneur.     And  the  law 

ver  le  superieur,   et  luy   dire,   Sire,    le  certainly  applies  to  the  kinj*  exclusively ; 

gentilhomme  de  qui  je  tiens  mon  fief  se  for,  in   case  of    denial   of  justice   by   a 

plaint   que  vous  lui  refuses  justice  :  je  mesne  lord,  there  was  an  appeal  to  the 

riens  pour  en  scavoir  la  verite ;  car  je  king's  court,  but  from  his  injury  ther* 

suis  semonce  de  marcher  en  guerre  con-  could  be  no  appeal  but  to  the  sword 


(70  FEUDAL  CEREMONIES.        Chap.  II.  Part  l 

no  longer  considered  himself  as  his  vassal,  but  renounced  his 
homage  and  defied  him.1 

The  ceremonies  used  in  conferring  a  fief  were  principally 
Cereuio-  three  —  homage,  fealty,  and  investiture.  1.  The 
niesof—  first  was  designed  as  a  significant  expression  of 
the  submission  and  devotedness  of  the  vassal  tow- 
ards his  lord.  In  performing  homage,  his  head  was  uncov- 
ered, his  belt  ungirt,  his  sword  and  spurs  removed;  he  placed 
his  hands,  kneeling,  between  those  of  the  lord,  and  promised 
to  become  his  man  from  thenceforward ;  to  serve  him  with 
life  and  limb  and  worldly  honor,  faithfully  and  loyally,  in 
consideration  of  the  lands  which  he  held  under  him.  None 
but  the  lord  in  person  could  accept  homage,  which  was  com- 
„  monly  concluded  by  a  kiss.2     2.  An  oath  of  fealty 

was  indispensable  in  every  fief;  but  the  ceremony 
was  less  peculiar  than  that  of  homage,  and  it  might  be  re- 
ceived by  proxy.  It  was  taken  by  ecclesiastics,  but  not  by 
minors ;  and  in  language  differed  little  from  the  form  of 
3.  investi-  homage.3  3.  Investiture,  or  the  actual  conveyance 
ture.  0f  feu(iai  lands,  was  of  two  kinds  ;  proper  and  im- 

proper. The  first  was  an  actual  putting  in  possession  upon 
the  ground,  either  by  the  lord  or  his  deputy ;  which  is  called, 
in  our  law,  livery  of  seisin.  The  second  was  symbolical, 
and  consisted  in  the  delivery  of  a  turf,  a  stone,  a  wand,  a 
branch,  or  whatever  else  might  have  been  made  usual  by 
the  caprice  of  local  custom.  Du  Cange  enumerates  not  less 
than  ninety-eight  varieties  of  investitures.4 

Upon  investiture,  the  duties  of  the  vassal  commenced. 
Obligations  These  it  is  impossible  to  define  or  enumerate  ; 
of  a  vassal,  because  the  services  of  military  tenure,  which  is 
chiefly  to  be  considered,  were  in  their  nature  uncertain,  and 

1  Du  Cange,  Observations  sur  Join-  s.  85.  Assises  de  Jerusalem,  c.  204  ;  Crag, 
ville,  in  Collection  des  Memoires,  t.  i.  p.  1.  i.  tit.  11 ;  Recueil  dea  Historians,  t.  ii. 
196.  It  was  always  necessary  for  a  vassal  preface,  p.  174.  Homagium  per  pern- 
io renounce  his  homage  before  he  made  gium  was  unaccompanied  b\  any  feudal 
war  on  his  lord,  if  he  would  avoid  the  obligation,  and  distinguished  from  ho- 
shame  and  penalty  of  feudal  treason,  magium  ligeum,  which  carried  with  it  an 
After  a  reconciliation  the  homage  was  obligation  of  fidelity.  The  dukes  of  Nor- 
L.  And  in  this  no  distinction  was  man dy  rendered  only  homage  per  para 
made  between  the  king  and  another  su-  gium  to  the  kings  of  France,  and  received 
perior.  Thus  Henry  II.  did  homage  to  the  like  from  the  'hikes  of  Britany.  In 
the  king  of  France  in  1188,  having  re-  liege  homage  it  was  usual  to  make  reser- 
nounced  his  former  obligation  to  him  at  vations  of  allegiance  to  the  king,  or  any 
the  commencement  of  the  preceding  war.  other  lord  whom  the  homager  had  previ 
M   •    Parte,  p.  126.  ously  acknowledged. 

-  Du  Cange,  Hominium,  and  Carpen-  *  Littl.  8.  91;   Du  Cange,  too.  Fidelitas 

tiers    Supplement,  id.     voc.    Littleton,  *  Du  Cange,  voc.  Investitura 


Fjludai.  System. 


MILITARY   SERVICE. 


17* 


distinguished  as  such  from  those  incident  to  feuds  of  an  infe- 
rior description.  It  was  a  breach  of  faith  to  divulge  the 
lord's  counsel,  to  conceal  from  him  the  machinations  of  others, 
to  injure  his  person  or  fortune,  or  to  violate  the  sanctity  of 
his  roof  and  the  honor  of  his  family.1  In  battle  he  was 
bound  to  lend  his  horse  to  his  lord,  when  dismounted ;  to 
adhere  to  his  side,  while  fighting ;  and  to  go  into  captivity  as 
a  hostage  for  him,'  when  taken.  His  attendance  was  due  to 
the  lord's  courts,  sometimes  to  witness,  and  sometimes  to 
bear  a  part  in,  the  administration  of  justice.2 

The  measure,  however,  of  military  service  was  generally 
settled  by  some  usage.     Forty  days  was  the  usual  Limitation8 
term  during  which  the  tenant  of  a  knight's  fee  was  of  military 
bound  to  be  in  the  field  at  his  own  expense.3    This  sernce- 
was  extended  by  St.  Louis  to  sixty  days,  except  when  the 
charter  of  infeudation  expressed  a  shorter  period.     But  the 
length  of  service  diminished  with  the  quantity  of  land.     For 
half  a  knight's  fee  but  twenty  days  were  due ;  for  an  eighth 


1  Assises  de  Jerusalem,  c.  265.  Home 
ne  doit  a  la  feme  de  son  seigneur,  ne  a  sa 
fille  requerre  vilainie  de  son  cors,  ne  a  sa 
soeur  tant  com  elle  est  demoiselle  en  son 
hostel.  I  mention  this  part  of  feudal 
duty  on  account  of  the  light  it  throws  on 
the  statute  of  treasons,  25  E.  III.  One 
of  the  treasons  therein  specified  is,  si 
omne  violast  la  compaigne  le  roy,  ou 
leignefile  le  roy  nient  marie  ou  la  com- 
paigne leigne  fitz  et  heire  le  roy.  Those 
who,  like  Sir  E.  Coke  and  the  modern 
lawyers  in  general,  explain  this  provision 
by  the  political  danger  of  confusing  the 
royal  blood,  do  not  apprehend  its  spirit. 
It  would  be  absurd,  upon  such  grounds, 
to  render  the  violation  of  the  king's  eldest 
daughter  treasonable,  so  long  only  as  she 
remains  unmar  ied,  when,  as  is  obvious, 
the  danger  of  a  spurious  issue  inheriting 
could  not  arise.  I  consider  this  provision 
therefore  as  entirely  founded  upon  the 
feudal  principles,  which  make  it  a  breach 
of  faith  (that  is.  in  the  primary  sense  of 
the  word,  a  treason)  to  sully  the  honor 
of  the  lord  in  that  of  the  near  relations 
who  were  immediately  protected  by  resi- 
dence in  his  house.  If  it  is  asked  why 
this  should  be  restricted  by  the  statute 
to  the  person  of  the  eldest  daughter,  I 
can  only  answer  that  this,  which  is  not 
more  reasonable  according  to  the  com- 
mon political  interpretation,  is  analogous 
to  many  feudal  customs  in  our  own  and 
other  countries,  which  attribute  a  sort 
of  superiority  in  dignity  to  the  eldest 
daughter. 


It  may  be  objected  that  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  III.  there  was  little  left  of  the 
feudal  principle  in  any  part  of  Europe, 
and  least  of  all  in  England.  But  the 
statute  of  treasons  is  a  declaration  of  the 
ancient  law,  and  comprehends,  undoubt- 
edly, what  the  judges  who  drew  it  could 
find  in  records  now  perished,  or  in  legal 
traditions  of  remote  antiquity.  Similar 
causes  of  forfeiture  are  enumerated  in 
the  Libri  Feudorum,  1.  i.  tit.  5,  and  1.  ii. 
tit.  24.  In  the  Establishments  of  St. 
Louis,  c.  51,  52,  it  is  said  that  a  lord 
seducing  his  vassal's  daughter  intrusted 
to  his  custody  lost  his  seigniory  ;  a  vassal 
guilty  of  the  same  crime  towards  the 
family  of  his  suzerain  forfeited  his  land. 
A  proof  of  the  tendency  which  the  feudal 
law  had  to  purify  public  morals,  and  to 
create  that  sense  of  indignation  and  re 
sentmeut  with  which  we  now  regard 
such  breaches  of  honor. 

2  Assises  de  Jerusalem,  c.  222.  A  vas- 
sal, at  least  in  many  places,  was  bound 
to  reside  upon  his  fief,  or  not  to  quit  it 
without  the  lord's  consent.  Du  Cau^e. 
voc.  Reseantia,  Remanentia,  Recueil  des 
Historiens,  t.  xi.  preface,  p.  172. 

3  In  the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem  feudal 
service  extended  to  a  year.  Assises  de 
Jerusalem,  c.  230.  It*  is  obvious  that 
this  was  founded  on  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  that  state.  Service  of  castle 
guard,  which  was  common  in  the  north 
of  England,  was  performed  without  lim 
Ration  of  time.  Lyttelton's  Henry  II 
vol.  ii.  p.  184- 


172 


MILITARY  SEKYICk. 


Chap.  II.  Paui 


part,  but  five ;  and  when  this  was  commuted  for  an  escuage 
or  pecuniary  assessment,  the  same  proportion  was  observed.1 
Men  turned  of  sixty,  public  magistrates,  and,  of  course,  wo- 
men, were  free  from  personal  service,  but  obliged  to  send 
their  substitutes.  A  failure  in  this  primary  duty  incurred 
perhaps  strictly  a  forfeiture  of  the  fief.  But  it  was  usual  for 
the  lord  to  inflict  an  amercement,  known  in  England  by  the 
name  of  escuage.2  Thus,  in  Philip  III.'s  expedition  against 
the  count  de  Foix  in   1274,  barons  were  d  for  their 

default  of  attendance  at  a  hundred  sous  a  day  for  the  ex- 
penses which  they  had  saved,  and  fifty  sous  as  a  tine  to  the 
king;  bannerets,  at  twenty  sous  for  expenses,  and  ten  as  a 
fine ;  knights  and  squires  in  the  same  proportion.  But  ba- 
rons and  bannerets  were  bound  to  pay  an  additional  assess- 
ment for  every  knight  and  squire  of  their  vassals  whom  they 
ought  to  have  brought  with  them  into  the  field.3  The  regu- 
lations as  to  the  place  of  service  were  less  uniform  than 
those  which  regarded  time.  In  some  places  the  vassal  was 
not  bound  to  go  beyond  the  lord's  territory,4  or  only  so  far  as 
that  he  might  return  the  same  day.  Other  customs  com- 
pelled  him   to   follow   his   chief   upon   all   his   expeditions.6 


1  Du  Cange,  voc.  Feudum  militis; 
Menibrum  Loricas.  Stuart's  View  of  So- 
ciety, p.  382.  This  division  by  knight's 
fees  is  perfectly  familiar  in  the  feudal 
law  of  England.  .Cut  I  must  confess  my 
inability  to  adduce  decisive  evidence  of  it 
in  that  of  France,  with  the  usual  excep- 
tion of  Normandy.  According  to  the 
natural  principle  of  fiefs,  it  might  seem 
that  the  suuie  personal  service  would  be 
required  from  the  tenant,  whatever  were 
the  extent  of  his  land.  William  the 
Conqueror,  it  is  said,  distributed  this 
kingdom  into  about  60,000  parcels  of 
nearly  equal  value,  from  each  of  which 
the  service  of  a  soldier  was  due.  He  may 
possibly  have  been  the  inventor  of  this 
politic  arrangement.  Some  rule  must, 
however,  have  been  observed  in  all  coun- 
tries in  fixing  the  amercement  for  ab- 
sence, which  could  only  be  equitable  if 
it  bore  a  just  proportion  to  the  value  of 
the  fief.  And  the  principle  of  the  knight's 
fee  was  so  convenient  and  reaso 
that  it  is  likely  to  have  been  adopted  in 
Imitation  of  England  by  other  feudal 
countries.  In  the  roll  of  Philip  III.'s 
expedition,  as  will  appear  by  a  note  im- 
mediately  below,  there  are,  I  think,  sev- 
eral presumptive  evidences  of  it:  and 
i  this  is  rather  a  late  authori- 
ty   to  establish    a   feudal    principle,  yet 


I   have   ventured   to  assume  it  in   the 
text. 

The  knight's  fee  was  fixed  in  England 
at  the  annual  value  of  20/.  Every  estate 
supposed  to  be  of  this  value,  and  entered 
as  such  in  the  rolls  of  the  exchequer,  was 
bound  to  contribute  the  service  of  a 
soldier,  or  to  pay  an  escuage  to  the  amount 
assessed  upon  knights'  fee. 

2  Littleton,  1.  ii.  c.3;  Wright's  Tenures, 
p.  121. 

3  Du  Chesne,  Script.  Rerum  Gallica- 
rum,  t.  v.  p.  553.  Danicd,  Histoire  de  la 
Milice  Francoise,  p.  72.  The  following 
extracts  from  the  muster-roll  of  this  ex- 
pedition, will  illustrate  the  varieties  of 
feudal  obligations.  Johannes  d'Ormoy 
debet  servitium  per  quatuor  dies.  Jo- 
hannea  Malet  debet  servitium  per  vigintl 
dies,  pro  quo  servitio  misit  Kichardum 
Tichet.  Guido  de  Laval  debet  servitium 
dm. rum  inilitum  et  dimidii.  Domiuus 
Sabrandus  dictus  Chabot  dicit  quod  nou 
debet  servitium  domino  regi,  nisi  in  co* 
mitatu  Pictaviensi,  et  ad  sumptus  regis, 
tan, en  venif  ad  preces  regis  cum  tribus 
multibus  et  duodecim  scutiferis.     Guido 

de  Lusigniaco  I) de  Pierac  dicit,  quod 

no. i  debet  aliquid  regi  prseterhomagium. 

*  This  was  the  custom  of  Beauvoisis 
Beaumanoir,  c.  2 
6  Du  Cange,  et  Carpentier,  voc.  Hostis 


Feudal  System.  FEUDAL  INCIDENTS.  173 

These  inconvenient  and'  varying  usages  betrayed  the  origin 
of  the  feudal  obligations,  not  founded  upon  any  national  pol- 
icy, but  springing  from  the  chaos  of  anarchy  and  intestine 
war,  which  they  were  well  calculated  to  perpetuate.  For 
the  public  defence  then-  machinery  was  totally  unserviceable, 
until  such  changes  were  wrought  as  destroyed  the  character 
of  the  fabric. 

Independently  of  the  obligations  of  fealty  and  service 
which  the  nature  of  the  contract  created,  other  Feudal 
advantages  were  derived  from  it  by  the  lord,  which  incidents, 
have  been  called  feudal  incidents  :  these  were,  1.  Reliefs.  2. 
Fines  upon  alienation.  3.  Escheats.  4.  Aids  ;  to  which 
may  be  added,  though  not  generally  established,  5.  Ward- 
ship, and  C.  Marriage. 

1.  Some  writers  have  accounted  for  Reliefs  in  the  follow- 
ing manner.  Benefices,  whether  depending  upon 
the  crown  or  its  vassals,  were  not  originally  granted 
by  way  of  absolute  inheritance,  but  renewed  from  time  to  time 
upon  the  death  of  the  possessor,  till  long  custom  grew  up  into 
right.  Hence  a  sum  of  money,  something  between  a  price 
and  a  gratuity,  would  naturally  be  offered  by  the  heir  on 
receiving  a  fresh  investiture  of  the  fief;  and  length  of  time 
might  as  legitimately  turn  this  present  into  a  due  of  the  lord, 
as  it  rendered  the  inheritance  of  the  tenant  indefeasible. 
This  is  a  very  specious  account  of  the  matter.  But  those 
who  consider  the  antiquity  to  which  hereditary  benefices  may 
be  -traced,  and  the  unreserved  expressions  of  those  instru- 
ments by  which  they  were  created,  as  well  as  the  undoubted 
fact  that  a  large  proportion  of  fiefs  had  been  absolute  alodial 
inheritances,  never  really  granted  by  the  superior,  will  per- 
haps be  led  rather  to  look  for  the  origin  of  reliefs  in  that 
rapacity  with  which  the  powerful  are  ever  ready  to  oppress 
the  feeble.  When  a  feudal  tenant  died,  the  lord,  taking  ad- 
vantage of  his  own  strength  and  the  confusion  of  the  family, 
would  seize  the  estate  into  his  hands,  either  by  the  right  of 
force,  or  under  some  litigious  pretext.  Against  this  violence 
the  heir  could  in  general  have  no  resource  but  a  compromise  ; 
and  Ave  know  how  readily  acts  of  successful  injustice  change 
their  name,  and  move  demurely,  like  the  wolf  in  the  fable, 
under  the  clothing  of  law.  Reliefs  and  other  feudal  inci- 
dents are  said  to  have  been  established  in  France 1  about  the 

1  Ordonnnnces  des  Rois  de  France,  t.  i.  preface,  p.  10. 


174  FEUDAL  INCIDENTS.  Chap.  11.  Fabi  J 

latter  part  of  the  tenth  century,  and 'they  certainly  appear  in 
the  famous  edict  of  Conrad  the  Salic,  in  1037,  which  recognizes 
the  usage  of  presenting  horses  and  arms  t<>  the  lord  upon  a 
change  of  tenancy.1  But  this  also  subsisted  under  the  name 
of  heriot,  in  England,  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Canute. 

A  relief  was  a  sum  of  money  (unless  where  charter  or 
custom  introduced  a  different  tribute;  due  from  every  one  of 
lull  age,  taking  a  fief  by  descent.  This  was  in  >ome  countries 
arbitrary,  or  ad  misericordiam,  and  the  exactions  practised 
under  this  pretence  both  upon  superior  and  inferior  vassals 
ranked  amongst  the  greatest  abuses  of  the  feudal  policy. 
Henry  I.  of  England  promises  in  his  charter  that  they  shall  in 
future  be  just  and  reasonable  ;  but  the  rate  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  finally  settled  till  it  was  laid  down  in  Magna  Charta 
at  about  a  fourth  of  the  annual  value  of  the  fief.  We  find  also 
fixed  reliefs  among  the  old  customs  of  Normandy  and  Beau- 
voisis.  By  a  law  of  St.  Louis,  in  1245,2  the  lord  was 
entitled  to  enter  upon  the  lands,  if  the  heir  could  not  pay  the 
relief,  and  possess  them  for  a  year.  This  right  existed 
unconditionally  in  England  under  the  name  of  primer  seisin, 
but  was  confined  to  the  king.3 

2.  Closely  connected  with  reliefs  were  the  fines  paid  to  the 
Fines  upou  lord  upon  the  alienation  of  his  vassal's  feud;  and 
alienation,  indeed  we  frequently  find  them  called  by  the  same 
name.  The  spirit  of  feudal  tenure  established  so  intimate  a 
connection  between  the  two  parties  that  it  could  be  dissolved 
by  neither  without  requiring  the  other's  consent.  If  the  lord 
transferred  his  seigniory,  the  tenant  was  to  testify  his  concur- 
rence ;  and  this  ceremony  was  long  kept  up  in  England  under 
the  name  of  attornment.  The  assent  of  the  lord  to  his  vas- 
sal's alienation  was  still  more  essential,  and  more  difficult  to 
be  attained.  He  had  received  his  fief,  it  was  supposed,  for 
reasons  peculiar  to  himself,  or  to  his   family;  at   least  his 

i  Servato  usu   valvassorum    majorum  sion.  Cofitumes  de  Beauvoisis,  c.  27.  And 

in  tradeadis  armis  equisque  suis  seniori-  this,    according  to    Du  Cange,  was  the 

bus.    This,  among  other  reasons,  leads  general    rule  in  the  customary   law  of 

me  to  doubt  the  received  opinion  that  France.     In  Anjou  and  Maine  they  were 

Italian  net's   were   not  hereditary  before  not    even   due  upon  succession   between 

the  promulgation  of  this  edict.  brothers.     Ordonnances  des  Rois,t.  i.  p 

*  Ordonnances  dee  Rois,  p.  55.  58.     And  M.  de  Pastoret,  in  his  valuable 

:i  Du  Cange,  v.  Placituui.  Relevium,  preface  to  the  sixteenth  volume  of  that 

Sporla.     By  many  customs  a  relief  was  collection,   says  it   was  a  rule   th:it   the 

due  on  every  change  of  the  lord,  as  well  king  had  nothing  upon  lineal  succession 

as  of  the   vassal,  hut  this  was  not  the  of  a  fief,  whether  in  the  ascending  0*  do 

case  in  England.     Beaumont  speaks  of  scending  line,  hut  to  bottehe  et  les  mains  ; 

reliefs  as  due  only  on  collateral  succes-  i.  e.  homage  and  fealty  :  p.  20. 


Feudal  System.       FIXES    UPON    ALIENATION.  175 

heart  and  arm  were   bound  to  his  superior ;  and  his  service 
was  not  to  be  exchanged  for  that  of  a  stranger,  who  mio-ht 
be  unable  or  unwilling  to  render  it.     A  law  of  Lothaire  II, 
in  Italy  forbids  the  alienation  of  fiefs  without  the  lord's  con- 
sent.     This   prohibition  is  repeated  in  one  of  Frederic  L, 
and  a  similar  enactment  was  made  by  Roger  king  of  Sicily.' 
By  the    law  of    France  the   lord  was  entitled,  upon  every 
alienation  made  by  his  tenant,  either  to  redeem  the  fief  by 
paying  the  purchase-money,  or  to  claim  a  certain  part  of  the 
value,  by   way  of   tine,  upon   the  change  of  tenancy.3     In 
England  even  the  practice  of  subinfeudation,  which  was  more 
confonnable  to  the  law  of  fiefs  and  the  military  genius  of  the 
system,  but  injurious  to  the  suzerains,  who  lost  thereby  their 
escheats  and  other  advantages  of  seigniory,  was  checked  by 
Magna  Charta,4  and  forbidden  by  the  statute  18  Edward  I., 
called   Quia   Emptores,  which  at  the  same  time  gave  the 
liberty  of  alienating  lands,  to  be  holden  of  the  grantor's  im- 
mediate lord.     The  tenants  of  the  crown  were  not  included 
m  this  act ;  but  that  of  1   Edward  III.  c.  12,  enabled  them 
to  alienate,  upon  the  payment  of  a  composition  into  chancery, 
which  was  fixed  at  one  third  of   the  annual  value  of  the 
lands.6 

These  restraints,  placed  for  the  lord's  advantage  upon  the 
transfer  of  feudal  property,  are  not  to  be  confounded  with 
those  designed  for  the  protection  of  heirs  and  preservation 

i  Lib.  Feudorum,  1.  ii.   tit.  9  and  52.     ble  upon  the  original  principles  of  feudal 
This  was  principally  levelled  at  the  prac-     tenure  punupie*.  oi  ieuaai 

?f  ethpaIIh^1hnSSh-dtl  ProPerty|n/a^    J  Dalrymple  seems  to  suppose  that  the 

?nimi    SStaSi       r    ,  W-lS    °'-lledn  PJ.°  32d  Chapter  of  Ma°na  Chai-U  ^™  to 

SX™.JT    ?£      ^devious  in   testis  alienation   and   not    to   subinfeudation, 

tredeuc   I    1.  ,y   c    ,  ;  Lib.    Feud.   1.  i.  Essay  on  Feudal  Property',  edit.  1758,  p. 

tit    ,    16,  1.  ii  tit   10. _  83.     See  Sir  E.  Coke,  2  Inst.  p.  65,  501 ; 

P»r>h   m™  SV\    aCCI,pit<Um-  :  lacitum-  Hargrave  observes  that  "the  history  of 

tatnJ  *!     n  Pastoret'Prefkceau  sememe  our  law  with  respect  to  the  powers  of 

S   „1?  T?rdr^TaUCes- I''   -":  Houard>  alienation    before   the   statute  of   Qui. 

r*™t  Droit    Normand,   art.  Fief  Ar-  Emptores  terrarnm  is  very  much  in  vol* 

gou,  In.t.  du  Droit  Francois,  1.  ii   c.  2.  ed  in  obscurity."     Notes"  on  Co.  Lit.  43, 

L^rr^-  "ge   "I"1    d£trict     :it  a-    InGlanville'stimeapparenHvamS 

east,  subinfeudation   without  the  lord's  could  only  alienate  (to  hold  of  himself) 

license  incurred  a  forfeiture  of  the  land  ;  ratio nabilem  partem  de  terrasuaTvli  V 

anu  his  reason  extends  of  course  more  1.     But  this  may  have  been  in  favor  of 

strongly  _  to    alienation.      Cofitumes   de  the  kindred  as  much  as  of  the  lord.  Dal- 

Beauvoisis    c.    2;    Velly,  t.   vi.  p.  187.  rymple's  Essay,  ubi  supri, 
But,   by  the  general  law  of  feuds,    the         It  is  probable  that  Coke  is  mistaken 

kEE  TffTty-   T^  WhUe   the  iu  supposing  that"  at  the  common  law 

tenant    forfeited    his   land    by   the    lat-  the  tenant  might  have  made  a  feoffment 

ter.      Craig    mentions    this    distinction  of  the  whole  tenancy  to  be  holden  of  th« 

as   one   for    which    he   is    perplexed   to  lord." 

account.    Jus  Feudale,  1    iii.   tit.  3,   p.  5  2  Inst.  p.  66;  Blackstone's  CommeD 

W2.     It  is,  however,  perfectly  intelligi-  taries,  vol.  ii.  c.  5. 


176  FEUDAL    INCIDENTS:  Chap.  II.  Pari   I 

of  families.  Such  were  the  jus  protimeseos  in  the  books  of 
the  lief's,1  and  retrait  lignager  of  the  French  law,  which  gave 
to  the  relations  of  the  vendor  a  preemption  upon  the  sale 
of  any  fief,  and  a  right  of  subsequent  redemption.  Such 
was  the  positive  prohibition  of  alienating  a  fief  held  by  de- 
scent from  the  father  (feudum  paternum),  without  the  consent 
of  the  kindred  on  that  line.2  Such,  too,  were  the  still  more 
rigorous  fetters  imposed  by  the  English  statute  of  entails, 
which  precluded  all  lawful  alienation,  till,  after  two  centuries, 
it  was  overthrown  by  the  fictitious  process  of  a  common 
recovery.  Though  these  partake  in  some  measure  of  the 
feudal  spirit,  and  would  form  an  important  head  in  the  legal 
history  of  that  system,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  allude  to  them 
in  a  sketch  which  is  confined  to  the  development  of  its  polit- 
ical influence. 

A  custom  very  similar  in  effect  to  subinfeudation  wa* 
the  tenure  by  frerage,  which  prevailed  in  many  parts  of 
France.  Primogeniture,  in  that  extreme  which  our  com- 
mon law  has  established,  was  unknown,  I  believe,  in  every 
country  upon  the  Continent.  The  customs  of  France  found 
means  to  preserve  the  dignity  of  families,  and  the  indivisi- 
bility of  a  feudal  homage,  without  exposing  the  younger  sons 
of  a  gentleman  to  absolute  beggary  or  dependence.  Baronies, 
indeed,  were  not  divided ;  but  the  eldest  son  was  bound  to 
make  a  provision  in  money,  by  way  of  appanage,  for  the 
other  children,  in  proportion  to  his  circumstances  and  their 
birth.8  As  to  inferior  fiefs,  in  many  places  an  equal  partition 
was  made ;  in  others,  the  eldest  took  the  chief  portion,  gen- 
erally two  thirds,  and  received  the  homage  of  his  brothers 
for  the  remaining  part,  which  they  divided.  To  the  lord  of 
whom  the  fief  was  held,  himself  did  homage  for  the  whole.4 
In  the  early  times  of  the  feudal  policy,  when  military  ser- 
vice was   the  great  object  of  the  relation   between   lord  and 

I  Lib.   Feud.   1.  v.  t.  13.      There  were  puisne,  et  si  doit  les  filles  marier.     Eta- 

•nalofsies  to  this    jusTrpoTi/^ffewf    in  blissem.  de  St.  Louis,  o.  24. 

the  Roman  law,  and,  still  more  closely,  *1Tb«8.  was  afco  the  law  °  „H:l,1,krs 

lu   the  constitutions  ..f  the  latter  By:  :'"'1    Hainault.      Martenne,    rhwaurua 

•antine  emperors.  Anecdotor   t.  i.  p.  1092.     The  customs  as 

8  Alienatio  feudi    paterni   non    valet  to  suewssion  were  exeeedingly  Tarious, 

etiam  domini  volunt                            con-  *»  indeed  they  continued  to  be  until  the 

K-ntientibus.     Lib.  Fe ud.  apud    Wright  late  generalization  of  French  law.     Re- 

on  Tenures,  p.  108,  156.  lLu"!l  *e8    h"t,,r-  *■  "•   P»:vfacP-  JJ-  1^ 

8  Da  Cange.T.                    iturn,  Baro.  Hist,.                        oc,  t.  U-P-Uli  511. 

Baronie  ne  depart  mie  entre   freres   se  in  fee  fomer  work  it  is  said  tbAt  primo- 

leur  pere  ne  leur  n  fait    partie;  m<  ltu™   NN^    introduced    by   the  Nor- 

wasnez    doit    laire  aveoant  bienfet  au  mans  from  Scandinavia. 


Fkudal  System.  ESCHEATS —AIDS.  177 

vassal,  this,  like  all  other  subinfeudation,  was  rather  advan- 
tageous to  the  former ;  for  when  the  homage  of  a  fief  was 
divided,  the  service  was  diminished  in  proportion.  Suppose, 
for  example,  the  obligation  of  military  attendance  for  an  entire 
manor  to  have  been  forty  days ;  if  that  came  to  be  equally 
split  among  two,  each  would  owe  but  a  service  of  twenty. 
But  if,  instead  of  being  homagers  to  the  same  suzerain,  one 
tenant  held  immediately  of  the  other,  as  every  feudatary 
might  summon  the  aid  of  his  own  vassals,  the  superior  lord 
would,  in  fact,  obtain  the  service  of  both.  Whatever  opposi- 
tion, therefore,  was  made  to  the  rights  of  subinfeudation  or 
frerage,  would  indicate  a  decay  in  the  military  character,  the 
living  principle  of  feudal  tenure.  Accordingly,  in  the  reign 
of  Philip  Augustus,  when  the  fabric  was  beginning  to  shake", 
we  find  a  confederate  agreement  of  some  principal  nobles 
sanctioned  by  the  king,  to  abrogate  the  mesne  tenure  of 
younger  brothers,  and  establish  an  immediate  dependence  of 
each  upon  the  superior  lord.1  This,  however,  was  not  uni- 
versally adopted,  and  the  original  frerage  subsisted  to  the  last 
m  some  of  the  customs  of  France.2 

3.  As  fiefs  descended  but  to  the  posterity  of  the  first  taker, 
or  at  the  utmost  to  his  kindred,  they  necessarily  Escheats 
became  sometimes  vacant  for  want  of  heirs  ;  es-  and 
pecially  where,  as  in  England,  there  was  no  power  forfelta- 

of  devising  them  by  will.  In  this  case  it  was  obvious  that 
they  ought  to  revert  to  the  lord,  from  whose  property  they 
had  been  derived.  These  reversions  became  more  frequent 
through  the  forfeitures  occasioned  by  the  vassal's  delinquency, 
either  towards  his  superior  lord  or  the  state.  Various  cases 
are  laid  down  in  the  Assises  de  Jerusalem,  where  the  vassal 
forfeits  his  land  for  a  year,  for  his  life,  or  forever.3  But 
under  rapacious  kings,  sucli  as  the  Norman  line  in  England, 
absolute  forfeitures  came  to  prevail,  and  a  new  doctrine  was 
introduced,  the  corruption  of  blood,  by  which  the  heir  was 
effectually  excluded  from  deducing  his  title  at  any  distant 
time  through  an  attainted  ancestor. 

4.  Reliefs,  fines  upon  alienation,  and  escheats,  seem  to  be 
natural  reservations  in  the  lord's  bounty  to  his  vas- 

sal.     He  had  rights  of  another  class  which  princi- 
pally arose  out  of  fealty  and  intimate  attachment.     Such  werf 

i  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  29. 

2  Du  Cange,  Dissert.  III.  sur  Joinville  ;  Beauman  c.  47. 

3  C.  200,  201. 
VJL.  I.  —  M.  12 


l~6  FEUDAL  INCIDENTS.  Cim-    O.  Paw  I. 

ihe  aids  which  he  was  entitled  to  cull  for  in  certain  prescribed 
circumstances.  These  depended  a  great  deal  upon  local  cus- 
tom, and  were  often  extorted  unreasonably.  Du  Cange  men- 
tions several  as  having  existed  in  France  ;  such  as  an  aid  for 
the  lord's  expedition  to  the  Holy  Land,  for  marrying  his  sister 
or  eldest  son,  and  for  paying  a  relief  to  his  suzerain  on  taking 
possession  of  his  land.1  Of  these,  the  la.-t  appears  to  have 
been  the  most  usual  in  England.  But  this,  and  other  aids 
occasionally  exacted  by  the  lords,  were  felt  as  a  severs 
grievance  ;  and  by  Magna  Charta  three  only  are  retained  ; 
to  make  the  lord'-  eldest  son  a  knight,  to  marry  his  eldest 
daughter,  and  to  redeem  his  person  from  prison.  They  were 
restricted  to  nearly  the  same  description  by  a  law  of  William 
I.  of  Sicily,  and  by  the  customs  of  France.2  These  feudal 
aids  are  deserving  of  our  attention,  as  the  beginning-  of  tax- 
ation, of  which  lor  a  long  time  they  in  a  great  measure 
answered  the  purpose,  till  the  craving  necessities  and  covetous 
policy  of  kings  substituted  for  them  more  durable  and  onerous 
burdens. 

I  might  here,  perhaps,  close  the  enumeration  of  feudal 
incidents,  but  that  the  two  remaining,  wardship  and  marriage, 
though  only  partial  customs,  were  those  of  our  own  country 
and  tend  to  illustrate  the  rapacious  character  of  a  feudal  aris- 
tocracy. 

5.  In  England,  and  in  Normandy,  which  either  led  the 
rdshi  way  to,  or  adopted,  all  these  English  institutions, 
the  lord  had  the  wardship  of  his  tenant  during 
minority.8  By  virtue  of  this  right  he  had  both  the  care  of  his 
person  and  received  to  his  own  use  the  profits  of  the  estate. 
There  is  something  in  this  custom  very  conformable  to  the 
feudal  spirit,  since  none  was  so  fit  as  the  lord  to  train  up  his 
vassal  to  arms,  and  none  could  put  in  so  good  a  claim  to  enjoy 
the  fief,  while  the  military  service  for  which  it  had  been 
granted  was  suspended.  This  privilege  of  guardianship  seems 
to  have  been  enjoyed  by  the  lord  in  some  parts  of  Germany;  * 
hut  in  the  law  of  France  the  custody  of  the  hind  was  intrusted 
to  the  next  heir,  and  that  of  the  person,  as  in  socage  tenures 
among  us,  to  the  nearest  kindred  of  that  blood  which  could 

l  Du  Cange.  voc.  Auxilium.  162;  Argou,  Inst.  ;iu  Droit  Francois,  1. 1 

anone,  1.  xii.  c.  5;  Wily,  t.  vi.  p.  c.  6;  Houard.  Anciennes  Loix  des  Fran- 

2(K) ;  Ordonnances  dee  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  138,  t.  <^ois,  t.  i.  p.  147. 
kvI.  preface.  4  Schilter,  Institutions  Juris  Feudalis 

a  litcueil  des  Historians,  t.  xi.  pnif.  p.  p.  85. 


JJicuDAi,  System.        WAKDS HIP  — MARRIAGE.  179 

not  inherit.1  By  a  gross  abuse  of  this  custom  in  England,  the 
right  of  guardianship  in  chivalry,  or  temporary  possession  of 
the  lands,  was  assigned  over  to  strangers.  This  was  one  of 
the  most  vexatious  parts  of  our  feudal  tenures,  and  was  never, 
perhaps,  more  sorely  felt  than  in  their  last  stage  under  the 
Tudor  and  Stuart  families. 

6.  Another  right  given  to  the  lord  by  the  Norman  and 
English  laws,  was  that  of  marriage,  or  of  tendering  . 
a  husband  to  his  female  wards  while  under  age, 
whom  they  could  not  reject  without  forfeiting  the  value  of  the 
marriage  ;  that  is,  as  much  as  any  one  would  give  to  the 
guardian  for  such  an  alliance.  This  was  afterwards  extended 
to  male  wards,  and  became  a  very  lucrative  source  of  extor- 
tion to  the  crown,  as  well  as  to  mesne  lords.  This  custom 
seems  to  have  had  the  same  extent  as  that  of  wardships.  It 
is  found  in  the  ancient  books  of  Germany,  but  not  of  France.2 
The  kings,  however,  and  even  inferior  lords,  of  that  country, 
required  their  consent  to  be  solicited  for  the  marriage  of  their 
vassals'  daughters.  Several  proofs  of  this  occur  in  the  history 
as  well  as  in  the  laws  of  France  ;  and  the  same  prerogative 
existed   in    Germany,   Sicily,   and   England.3     A   still   more 

i  Du   Cange,  v.  Custodia ;  Assises   de  And  he  set  up  pretensions  to  the  custody 

Jerusalem,  c.  178;  Etablissemens  de  St.  of  the  duchy  of  Britany  after  the  death 

Louis,  c.  17;  Beaumauoir,  c.  15;  Argou,  of  his  sou  Geoffrey.    This  might  perhaps 

1.  i.  c.  6.     The  second  of  these  uses  nearly  be  justified  by  the  law  of  Normandy,  on 

the  same  expression  as  Sir  John  Fortescue  which    Britany    depended.     But    Philip 

in  accounting  for  the  exclusion  of  the  Augustus  made  a  similar  claim.    In  fact, 

next  heir  from  guardianship  of  the  per-  these  political  assertions  of  right,  prompt- 

son;  that  mauvaise   convoitise  li  fairoit  ed  by  ambition  and  supported  by  force, 

faire  la  garde  du  loup.  are  bad  precedents  to  establish  rules  of 

I  know  not  any  mistake  more  usual  in  jurisprudence.     Both  Philip  and  Henry 

English  writers  who  have  treated  of  the  were  abundantly  disposed  to   realize  so 

feudal  law  than  that  of  supposing  that  convenient  a  prerogative  as  that  of  guar- 

guardianship  in  chivalry  was  an  univer-  dianship  in  chivalry  over  the  fiefs  of  their 

sal  custom.   A  charter  of  1198,  in  Rymer,  vassals.    Lyttleton's  Henry  II.  vol.  iii.  p. 

t.  i    p.  105,  seems  indeed  to  imply  that  441. 

the  incidents  of  garde  noble  and  of  mar-  '-  Schilter.  ubi  supra.  Du  Gauge,  voc. 
riage  existed  in  the  Isle  of  Oleron.  But  Disparagare,  seems  to  admit  this  feudal 
Eleanor,  by  a  later  instrument,  grants  right  in  Prance  ;  but  the  passages  he 
that  the  inhabitants  of  that  island  should  quotes  do  not  support  it.  See  also  the 
have  the  wardship  and  marriage  of  their  word  Maritagium.  [M.  Guizot  Las  how- 
heirs  without  any  interposition,  and  ex-  ever  observed  (Hist,  de  la  Civilisation  en 
pressly  abrogates  all  the  evil  customs  France,  Le<jon  39)  that  the  feudal  inci- 
that  her  husband  had  introduced:  p.  112.  dents  of  guardianship  in  chivalry  by 
From  hence  I  should  infer  that  Henry  II.  marriage  were  more  frequent  than  1  seem 
had  endeavored  to  impose  these  feudal  to  suppose.  The  customary  law  was  so 
burdens  (which  perhaps  were  then  new  variable,  that  it  is  dangerous  to  rely  on 
even  in  England)  upon  his  continental  particular  instances,  or  to  found  a  gen- 
dominions.  Radulphus  de  Diceto  tells  us  eral  negative  on  their  absence.  1848.1 
of  a  claim  made  by  him  to  the  wardship  3  Ordonnances  des  Hois,  t.  i.  p.  155  , 
of  Chateauroux  in  Berry,  which  could  Assises  de  Jerus.  c.  180,  and  Thau- 
not  legally  have  been  subject  to  that  massiere's  uote;  Du  Cange,  ubi  supra' 
custom      Twisden,  X  Scriptores,  p.  599  QlanviL  1.  vii.  c.  12;  Giannone,  1.  xi.  c 


180  FEUDAL  INCIDENTS.        Chap.  li.  Part  1 

remarkable  law  prevailed  in  the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem.  The 
lord  might  summon  any  female  vassal  to  accept  one  of  three 
whom  he  should  propose  as  her  husband.  No  other  condition 
seems  to  have  been  imposed  on  him  in  selecting  these  suitors 
than  that  the}'  should  be  of  equal  rank  with  herself.  Neither 
the  maiden's  coyness  nor  the  widow's  affliction,  neither  aver- 
sion to  the  proffered  candidates  nor  love  to  one  more  favored, 
seem  to  have  passed  as  legitimate  excuses.  One,  only  one 
plea,  could  come  from  the  lady's  mouth  who  was  resolute  to 
hold  her  land  in  single  blessedness.  It  was,  that  she  was  past 
sixty  years  of  age  ;  and  after  this  unwelcome  confession  it  is 
justly  argued  by  the  author  of  the  law-book  which  I  quote, 
that  the  lord  could  not  decently  press  her  into  matrimony.1 
However  outrageous  such  an  usage  may  appear  to  our  ideas, 
it  is  to  be  recollected  that  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  that 
little  state  rendered  it  indispensable  to  possess  in  every  fief  a 
proper  vassal  to  fulfil  the  duties  of  war. 

These  feudal  servitudes  distinguish  the  maturity  of  the 
system.  No  trace  of  them  appears  in  the  capitularies  of 
Charlemagne  and  his  family,  nor  in  the  instruments  by  which 
benefices  were  granted.  1  believe  that  they  did  not  make 
part  of  the  regular  feudal  law  before  the  eleventh,  or,  per- 
haps, the  twelfth  century,  though  doubtless  partial  usages 
of  this  kind  had  grown  up  antecedently  to  either  of  those 
periods.  If  I  am  not  mistaken,  no  allusion  occurs  to  the 
lucrative  rights  of  seigniory  in  the  Assises  de  Jerusalem, 
which  are  a  monument  of  French  usages  in  the  eleventh 
century.  Indeed,  that  very  general  commutation  of  alodial 
property  into  tenure  which  took  place  between  the  middle  of 
the  ninth  and  eleventh  centuries  would  hardly  have  been 
effected  if  fiefs  had  then  been  liable  to  such  burdens  and 
so  much  extortion.  In  half-barbarous  ages  the  strong  are 
constantly  encroaching  upon  the  weak  ;  a  truth  which,  if  it 
needed  illustration,  might  find  it  in  the  progress  of  the  feudal 
system. 

We  have  thus  far  confined  our  inquiry  to  fiefs  holden  on 
terms  of  military  service ;  since  those  are  the  most  ancient 

6 ;  Wright  on  Tenures,  p.  94.  St.  Louis  lord  not  to  marry  her  without  his  con- 
in  return  declared  that  he  would  not  sent.  Etablissemens  de  St.  Louis,  c.  63. 
marry  his  own  daughter  without  the  '  Ass.  de  Jiirus.  c.  224.  I  must  observe 
consent  of  his  barons.  Joinville,  t.  ii.  p.  that  Lauriere  says  thi-;  usage  prevailed 
140.  Henry  I.  of  England  had  promised  en  plusieurs  lieux,  though  he  quotes  nc 
the  same.  The  guardian  of  a  female  authority.  —  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  p 
minor  was  obliged  to  give  security  to  her  155. 


!  i,«  dal  System.    PROPER  AND   IMPROPER  FEUDS.  18) 

and  regular,  as  well  as  the  most  consonant  to  the  0  . 

.    .      °,  Propei  and 

spirit  ot  the  system.  They  alone  were  called  proper  improper 
feuds,  and  all  were  presumed  to  be  of  this  descrip-  feuds' 
tion  until  the  contrary  was  proved  by  the  charter  of  investi- 
ture. A  proper  feud  was  bestowed  without  price,  without 
fixed  stipulation,  upon  a  vassal  capable  of  serving  personally 
in  the  field.  But  gradually,  with  the  help  of  a  little  legal  in- 
genuity, improper  fiefs  of  the  most  various  kinds  were  intro- 
duced, retaining  little  of  the  characteristics,  and  less  of  the 
spirit,  which  distinguished  the  original  tenures.  Women,  if 
indeed  that  were  an  innovation,  were  admitted  to  inherit 
them ; *  they  were  granted  for  a  price,  and  without  reference 
to  military  service.  The  language  of  the  feudal  law  was 
applied  by  a  kind  of  metaphor  to  almost  every  transfer  of 
property.  Hence  pensions  of  money  and  allowances  of  pro- 
visions, however  remote  from  right  notions  of  a  fief,  were 
sometimes  granted  under  that  name ;  and  even  where  land 
was  the  subject  of  the  donation,  its  conditions  were  often 
lucrative,  often  honorary,  and  sometimes  ludicrous.2 

There  is  one  extensive  species  of  feudal  tenure  which  may 
be  distinctly  noticed.  The  pride  of  wealth  in  the  Fiefs  of 
middle  ages  was  principally  exhibited  in  a  multi-  office- 
tude  of  dependents.  The  court  of  Charlemagne  was  crowded 
with  officers  of  every  rank,  some  of  the  most  eminent  of 
whom  exercised  functions  about  the  royal  person  which  would 
have  been  thought  fit  only  for  slaves  in  the  palace  of  Augus- 
tus or  Antonine.  The  freeborn  Franks  saw  nothing  menial 
in  the  titles  of  cup-bearer,  steward,  marshal,  and  master  of 
the  horse,  which  are  still  borne  by  the  noblest  families  in 
many  parts  of  Europe,  and,  till  lately,  by  sovereign  princes 
in  the  empire.8  From  the  court  of  the  king  this  favorite 
piece  of  magnificence  descended  to  those  of  the  prelates  and 

1  Women  did  not  inherit  fiefs  in  the  the  king  stipulates  to  pay  annually  400 
German  empire.  Whether  they  were  marks  of  silver,  in  ft-o/io,  for  the  niili- 
ever  excluded  from  succession  in  France  tary  service  of  his  ally,  llymer,  Fcede- 
1  know  not;    the  genius  of  a  military  ra,  t.  i.  p.  2.  , 

tenure,  and  the  old  Teutonic  customs,  3  The  count  of  Aujou,  under  Louis  VI., 

preserved  in  the  Salic  law,  seem  adverse  claimed  the  office  of  Great  Seneschal  of 

to  their  possession  of  feudal  lands ;  yet  France ;    that  is,   to  carry  dishes  to  the 

the  practice,  at  least  from  the  eleventh  king's  table  on  state  days.      (Sismrndi, 

century  downwards,  does    not   support  \.    135.)      Thus    the    feudal    notions   of 

the  theory.  grand  serjeanty  prepared  the  way  for  the 

2  Crag.  Jus  Feudale,  1.  i.  tit.  10;  Du  restoration  of  royal  supremacy,  as  the 
Cange,  voc.  Feudum  de  Camera,  &c.  In  military  tenures  had  impaired  it.  The 
the  treaty  between  Henry  I.  of  England  wound  and  the  remedy  came  from  th« 
and  Robert  count  of  Flanders,  A. D.  1101.  same  lance-      If  the  feudal  system  wa» 


182  FIEFS   OF  OFFICE.  Chap.  II.  Part  L 

baron?,  who  surrounded  themselves  with  household  officers 
called  ministerial-; ;  a  name  equally  applied  to  those  of  a  ser- 
vile and  of  a  Liberal  description.1  The  latter  of  these  were  re- 
warded with  grants  of  lands,  which  they  held  under  a  feudal 
tenure  by  the  condition  of  performing  some  domestic  service 
to  the  lord.  What  was  called  in  our  law  grand  serjeanty 
affords  an  instance  of  this  species  of  fief.2  It  is,  however,  an 
instance  of  the  noblest  kind;  but  Muratori  has  given  abun- 
dance of  proofs  that  the  commonest  mechanical  arts  were  car- 
ried on  in  the  houses  of  the  great  by  persons  receiving  lands 
upon  those  conditions.3 

These  imperfect  feuds,  however,  belong  more  properly  to 
the  history  of  law,  and  are  chiefly  noticed  in  the  present 
sketch  because  they  attest  the  partiality  manifested  during 
the  middle  ages  to  the  name  and  form  of  a  feudal  tenure. 
In  the  regular  military  fief  we  see  the  real  principle  of  the 
system,  which  might  originally  have  been  defined  an  alliance 
of  free  landholders  arranged  in  degrees  of  subordination, 
according  to  their  respective  capacities  of  affording  mutual 
support. 

The  peculiar  and  varied  attributes  of  feudal  tenures  natu 
Feudal  law-     rally  gave  rise  to  a  new  jurisprudence,  regulating 
books.  territorial  rights  in  those  parts  of  Europe  which 

had  adopted  the  system.  For  a  length  of  time  this  rested  in 
traditionary  customs,  observed  in  the  domains  of  each  prince 
or  lord,  without  much  regard  to  those  of  his  neighbors. 
Laws  were  made  occasionally  by  the  emperor  in  Germany 
and  Italy,  which  tended  to  fix  the  usages  of  those  countries. 
About  the  year  1170,  Girard  and  Oberins.  two  Milanese 
lawyers,  published  two  books  of  the  law  of  fiefs,  which  ob- 
tained a  great  authority,  and  have  been  regarded  as  the 
groundwork  of  that  jurisprudence.4  A  number  of  subse- 
quent commentators  swelled  this  code  with  their  glosses  and 

Incompatible  with  despotism,  and  even,  proper  person  to  the  king,  as  to  carry 

while   in  its  full  vigor,  with   legitimate  the  banner  of  the  king,  (  r  his  lance,  or 

authority,  it  kept  alive  the  sense  of  a  to  lead  hi  ■■  to  he  his  marshal, 

supreme  chief,  of  a  superiority  of  rank,  or  to  carry  his  sword  before  him  at  hi* 

of  a  certain  subjection  to  an  hered'tary  coronation,  or  to  he  his  sewer  at  his  cor- 

eovereign,  not  yet  testified  by  unlimited  onation,  or  his  carver,  or  his  butler,  or 

obedience,  but  by  homage  ami  loyalt}r.  to  be  one  of  his  chamberlains  at  the  r*- 

i  Schmidt,  Eist.  des  Allemands,  t.  iii.  ceipt  of  his  exchequer,  or  to  do  other 

p. 92;  DuOuip'.  v.  F;iinilia..Ministeriales.  like  services.*"     Sect.  153. 

-"This  tenure,"  says  Littleton,  "is        &  Antiq.  Ital.  Dissert.  11,  adSnam. 
where  a  man   holds  his  lands   or  tene-         *  Giannone,  1st.  di  Napoli,  1.  xiii.  c.  3 

ments  of  our  sovereign  lord  the  king  by  The  Libri  Feudorum  are  printed  iu  most 

»uch  services  as  lie  ought  to  do  in  his  editions  of  the  Corpus  Juris  Civilis 


Feudal  System.  FEUDAL   LAW-BOOKS.  183 

opinions,  to  enlighten  or  obscure  the  judgment  of  the  imperial 
tribunals.  These  were  chiefly  civilians  or  canonists,  who 
brought  to  the  interpretation  of  old  barbaric  customs  the 
principles  of  a  very  different  school.  Hence  a  manifest 
change  was  wrought  in  the  law  of  feudal  tenure,  which  they 
assimilated  to  the  usufruct  or  the  emphyteusis  of  the  Roman 
code  ;  modes  of  property  somewhat  analogous  in  appearance, 
but  totally  distinct  in  principle,  from  the  legitimate  fief. 
These  Lombard  lawyers  propagated  a  doctrine  which  has 
been  too  readily  received,  that  the  feudal  system  originated 
in  their  country ;  and  some  writers  upon  jurisprudence,  such 
as  Duck  and  Sir  James  Craig,  incline  to  give  a  preponder- 
ating authority  to  their  code.  But  whatever  weight  it  may 
have  possessed  within  the  limits  of  the  empire,  a  different 
guide  must  be  followed  in  the  ancient  customs  of  France  and 
England.1  These  were  fresh  from  the  fountain  of  that  curi- 
ous  polity  with  which  the  stream  of  Roman  law  had  never 
minded  its  waters.  In  England  we  know  that  the  Norman 
system  established  between  the  Conquest  and  the  reign  of 
Henry  II.  was  restrained  by  regular  legislation,  by  paramount 
courts  of  justice,  and  by  learned  writings,  from  breaking  into 
discordant  local  usages,  except  in  a  comparatively  small  num- 
ber of  places,  and  has  become  the  principal  source  of  our 
common  law.  But  the  independence  of  the  French  nobles 
produced  a  much  greater  variety  of  customs.  The  whole 
number  collected  and  reduced  to  certainty  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  amounted  to  two  hundred  and  eighty-five,  or,  omit- 
ting those  inconsiderable  for  extent  or  peculiarity,  to  sixty. 
The  earliest  written  customary  in  France  is  that  of  Beam, 
which  is  said  to  have  been  confirmed  by  Viscount  Gaston  IV. 
in  1088.2  Many  others  were  written  in  the  two  subsequent 
ages,  of  which  the  customs  of  Beauvoisis,  compiled  by  Beau- 

i  Giannono  explicitly  contrasts  the  lished  with  a  fresh  title-page  and  per- 
French  and  Lombard  laws  respecting  mission  of  Henry  TV.  in  1602  ;  the  other 
fiefs.  The  latter  was  the  foundation  of  at  Lescars,  iu  1633.  These  laws,  as  wti 
the  Libri  Feudorum.  and  formed  the  read  them,  are  subsequent  to  a  revision 
common  law  of  Italy.  The  former  was  made  in  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
intrcduced  by  Roger  Guiscard  into  his  (jury  in  which  they  were  more  or  less 
dominions,  in  three  books  of  constitn-  corrected.  The  basis,  however,  is  tui- 
tions, printed  in  Lindebrog"s  collection,  questionably  very  ancient.  We  even 
There  were  several  material  differences,  find  the  composition  for  homicide  pre 
which  Giannone  enumerates,  especially  served  in  them,  so  that  murder  was  not 
the  Norman  custom  of  primogeniture,  a  capital  offence  in  Beam,  though  rob- 
[st.  di  Nap.  1.  xi.  c.  5.  bery  was  such.  — -Rubrica  de  Homkidis, 

2  There  are  two  editions  of  this  curious  Art.  xxxi.     See  too  Rubrica.de  Poeni?. 

9ld  code ;  one  at  Pau.  in  1552,  repub-  Art.  i.  and  ii. 


184  FEUDAL  LAW-BOOKS.  Chat.  II.  Part  1 

manoir  under  Philip  ITI.,  are  the  most  celebrated,  and  con- 
tain a  mass  of  information  on  the  feudal  constitution  and 
manners.  Under  Charles  VII.  an  ordinance  was  made  for 
the  formation  of  a  general  code  of  customary  law,  by  ascer- 
taining forever  in  a  written  collection  those  of  each  district; 
but  the  work  was  not  completed  till  the  reign  of  Charles  IX. 
This  was  what  may  be  called  the  common  law  of  the  jxiys 
ooutumiers,  or  northern  division  of  France,  and  the  rule  of 
dl  their  tribunals,  unless  where  controlled  by  royal  edicts. 


Frugal  SrsTE*i.      ANALYSIS  CF  FEUDAL  SYSTEM.  !«.") 


PART  n. 

in&lysis  of  the  Feudal  System — Its  local  Extent  —  View  of  the  different  Orders  01 
Society  during  the  Feudal  Ages  —  Nobility — their  Rank."  j,nd  Privileges  — 
Clergy  —  Freemen  —  Serfs  or  Villeins  —  Comparative  State  of  France  and  Ger- 
man}'—  Privileges  enjoyed  by  the  French  Vassals  —  Right  of  coining  Money  — 
aud  of  private  War — Immunity  from  Taxation  —  Historical  View  of  the  Royal 
Revenue  in  France  —  Methods  adopted  to  augment  it  by  Depreciation  of  the 
Coin,  &c.  —  Legislative  Power  —  its  State  under  the  Merovingian  Kings,  aud 
Charlemagne  —  His  Councils  —  Suspension  of  any  general  Legislative  Authority 
during  the  Prevalence  of  Feudal  Principles  —  the  King's  Council — Means 
adopted  to  supply  the  Want  of  a  National  Assembly  —  Gradual  Progress  of  the 
King's  Legislative  Power  —  Philip  IV.  assembles  the  States-General  —  Their 
Powers  limited  to  Taxation  —  States  under  the  Sons  of  Philip  IV.  —  States  of 
1355  aud  1356  —  They  nearly  effect  an  entire  Revolution — The  Crown  recovers 
its  Vigor  —  States  of  1380,  under  Charles  VI. — Subsequent  Assemblies  undei 
Charles  VI.  and  Charles  VII.  —  The  Crown  becomes  more  and  more  absolute  — 
Louis  XI.  —  States  of  Tours  in  1484  —  Historical  View  of  Jurisdiction  in  Frauce 

—  Its  earliest  Stage  under  the  first  Race  of  Kings,  and  Charlemagne  —  Territorial 
Jurisdiction—  Feudal  Courts  of  Justice  —  Trial  by  Combat  —  Code  of  St.  Couia 

—  The  Territorial  Jurisdictions  give  way  —  Progress  of  the  Judicial  Power  of 
the  Crown  —  Parliament  of  Paris  —  Peers  of  France  —  Increased  Authority  of 
the  Parliament  —  Registration  of  Edicts  —  Causes  of  the  Decline  of  the  Feudal 
System  —  Acquisitions  of  Domain  by  the  Crown  —  Charters  of  Incorporation 
granted  to  Towns  —  Their  previous  Condition  —  First  Charters  in  the  Twelfth 
Century  —  Privileges  contained  iu  them  —  Military  Service  of  Feudal  Tenants 
commuted  for  Money  —  Hired  Troops  —  Change  in  the  Military  System  of  Europe 

—  General  View  of  the  Advantages  and  Disadvantages  attending  the  Feudal 
System. 

The  advocates  of  a  Roman  origin  for  most  of  the  institu- 
tions which  we  find  in  the  kingdoms  erected  on  the  ruins  of 
the  empire  are  naturally  prone  to  magnify  the  analogies  tG 
feudal  tenure  which  Rome  presents  to  us,  and  even  to  deduce 
it  either  from  the  ancient  relation  of  patron  and  client,  and 
that  of  personal  commendation,  which  was  its  representative  in 
a  later  age,  or  from  the  frontier  lands  granted  in  the  third 
century  to  the  Lasti,  or  barbarian  soldiers,  who  held  them, 
doubtless,  subject  to  a  condition  of  military  service.  The 
usage  of  commendation  especially,  so  frequent  in  the  fifth 
century,  before  the  conquest  of  Gaul,  as  well  as  afterwards, 
does  certainly  bear  a  strong  analogy  to  vassalage,  and  I  have 
already  pointed  it  out  as  one  of  its  sources.  It  wanted,  how- 
ever, that  definite  relation  to  the  tenure  of  land  which  dis- 
tinguished the  latter.  The  royal  Antrustio  (whether  (he 
word  commendatus  were  applied  to  him  or  not)  stood  bound 
by  gratitude  and  loyalty  to  his  sovereign,  and  in  a  very  differ- 


18G  ANALYSIS  OF   FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  Chap  II.  I'akt  II 

ent  degree  from  a  common  subject  ;  but  he  was  not  perhaps 

strictly  a  vassal  till  he  had  received  a  territorial  benefice.1 
The  complexity  of  subinfeudation  could  have  no  analogy  in 
commendation.  The  grants  to  veterans  and  to  the  La^ti  are 
so  far  only  analogous  to  fief-,  that  they  established  the  prin- 
ciple of  holding  lands  on  a  condition  of  military  service.  But 
this  service  was  no  more  than  what,  both  under  Charlemagne 
and  in  England,  if  not  in  other  time-  and  places,  the  alodial 
freeholder  was  bound  to  render  for  the  defence  of  the  realm  ; 
it  was  more  commonly  required,  because  the  lands  were  on  a 
barbarian  frontier;  but  the  duty  was  not  even  ve?y  analo- 
gous to  that  of  a  feudal  tenant.2  The  essence  of  a  fief  seems 
to  be,  that  its  tenant  owed  fealty  to  a  lord,  and  not  to  the  state 
or  the  sovereign  ;  the- lord  might  be  the  latter,  but  it  was  not. 
feudally  speaking,  as  a  sovereign  that  he  was  obeyed.  Tin- 
is,  therefore,  sufficient  to  warrant  us  in  tracing  the  real  theory 
of  feuds  no  higher  than  the  Merovingian  history  in  France  ; 
their  full  establishment,  as  has  been  seen,  is  considerably 
later.  But  the  preparatory  steps  in  the  constitutions  of  the 
declining  empire  are  of  considerable  importance,  not  merely 
as  analogies,  but  as  predisposing  circumstances,  and  even 
germs  to  lie  subsequently  developed.  The  beneficiary  tenure 
of  lands  could  not  Avell  be  brought  by  the  conquerors  from 
Germany ;  but  the  donatives  of  arms  or  precious  metals 
bestowed  by  the  chiefs  on  their  followers  were  also  analogous 
to  fiefs  ;  and.  as  the  Roman  institutions  were  one  source  of 
the  law  of  tenure,  so  these  were  another. 

It  is  of  great  importance  to  be  on  our  guard  against  seeming 
analogies  which  vanish  away  when  they  are  closely  observed. 
We  should  speak  inaccurately  if  we  were  to  use  the  word 
feudal  for  the  service  of  the  Irish  or  Highland  clans  to  their 
chieftain  :  their  tie  was  that  of  imagined  kindred  and  respeel 
for  birth,  not  the  spontaneous  compact  of  vassalage.  Much 
less  can  we  extend  the  name  of  feud,  though  it  is  sometime: 

l  This   word   "vassal1'    is    used  very  consequebantur,  ut  delectibus  quoque  ob  ■ 

Indefinitely;  it    means,    in    its   original  noxii  <-ss-  nt   et  legionibu!  insererentur 

Bense,  only  a  servant  or  dependant.  "But  (Not.  ad  Cod.  Theod.  1.  vii.  tit.  20,  c.  12. 

in   the  continental   records  of  histories  Sir   Francis    Palgrave,  however,  Bays,— 

we  commonly  find  it  applied  to  feudal  "The  duty  of  bearing  arms  was  insepara 

tenants.  bly  connected  with  the  property."    (Eug 

-  If  Gotho'fred  is  right  in  his  construe-  lish  Commonwealth,  i.  354.)    this  is  t<,« 

tionof  the  tenure  of  thesi  Lseti,  they  were  equivocal ;  but  he  certainly  means  morr 

not  even  generally  liable  to  this  part  of  than  Gothofre.l  ;  he  supposes  a  permauen 

our  trinoda  necessitas,  but  only  to  con-  universal  obligation  to  render  service  ir 

Bcription  for  the  legions.     Et  ea  tamen  all  public  warfare. 
conditione   terras    illis   excolendas   Lseti 


Feudal  System. 


ITS   EXTEN1, 


187 


strangely  misapplied,  to  the  polity  of  Poland  and  Russia. 
All  the  Polish  nobles  were  equal  in  rights,  and  independent 
of  each  other  ;  all  who  were  less  than  noble  were  in  servitude. 
No  government  can  be  more  opposite  to  the  long  gradations 
and  mutual  duties  of  the  feudal  system.1 

The   regular   machinery  and  systematic  establishment  of 
feuds,  in  met,  may  be  considered  as  almost  confined  Extent  of 
to   the   dominions  of   Charlemagne,  and   to   those  the  feudal 
countries  which  afterwards  derived  it  from  thence.  sys  em* 
In  England  it  can  hardly  be  thought  to  have  existed  in  a 
complete  state  before  the  Conquest.     Scotland,  it  is  supposed, 
borrowed  it  soon  after  from  her  neighbor.     The  Lombards  of 
Benevento  had  introduced  feudal  customs  into  the  Neapolitan 
provinces,- which  the  Norman  conquerors  afterwards  perfected. 
Feudal  tenures  were  so  general  in  the  kingdom  of  Aragon, 
that  I  reckon  it  amons;  the  monarchies  which  were  founded 
upon  that  basis.2     Charlemagne's  empire,  it  must  be  remem- 
bered, extended  as  far  as  the  Ebro.     But  in   Castile 3  and 
Portugal  they  were  very  rare,  and  certainly  could  produce  no 


1  In  civil  history  many  instances  might 
be  found  of  feudal  ceremonies  in  couutries 
not  regulated  by  the  feudal  law.  Thus 
Selden  has  published  an  infeudation  of  a 
vay  vod  of  Moldavia  by  the  king  of  Poland, 
a.d.  1485,  in  the  regular  forms,  vol.  iii.  p. 
514.  But  these  political  fiefs  have  hardly 
any  connection  with  the  general  system, 
and  merely  denote  the  subordination  of 
one  prince  or  people  to  another. 

2  It  is  probable  that  feudal  tenure  was 
as  ancient  in  the  north  of  Spain  as  in  the 
contiguous  provinces  of  Frauce.  But  it 
seems  to  have  chiefly  prevailed  in  Aragon 
about  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centu- 
ries, when  the  Moors  south  of  the  Ebro 
were  subdued  by  the  enterprise  of  private 
nobles,  who,  after  conquering  estates  for 
themselves,  did  homage  for  them  to  the 
king.  James  T.,  upon  the  reduction  of 
Valencia,  granted  lands  by  way  of  fief,  on 
condition  of  defending  that  kingdom 
against  the  Moors,  and  residing  person- 
ally upon  the  estate.  Many  did  not  per- 
form this  engagement,  and  were  deprived 
of  the  lands  in  consequence.  It  appears 
by  the  testament  of  this  monarch  that 
feudal  tenures  subsisted  in  every  part  of 
his  dominions. — Martenne,  Thesaurus 
Anecdotorum,  t.  i.  p.  1141, 1155.  An  edict 
of  Peter  II.  in  1210  prohibits  the  aliena- 
tion of  emphyteuses  without  the  lord's 
consent.  It  is  hard  to  say  whether  regular 
fiefs  are  meant  by  this  word.  —  De  Marca, 
Marcs  Hispanica,  p.  1396.     This  author 


says  that  there  were  no  arriere-fiefs  in 
Catalonia. 

The  Aragonese  fiefs  appear,  however,  to 
have  differed  from  those  of  other  countries 
in  some  respects.  Zurita  mentions  fieft 
according  to  the  custom  of  Italy,  which  he 
explains  to  be  such  as  were  liable  to  the 
usual  feudal  aids  for  marrying  the  lord's 
daughter,  and  other  occasions .  We  may 
infer,  therefore,  that  these  prestations 
were  not  customai'y  in  Aragon.  —  Anales 
de  Aragon,  t.  ii.  p.  62. 

3  What  is  said  of  vassalage  in  Alfonzo 
X.'s  code,  Las  siete  partidas,  is  short  and 
obscure:  nor  am  I  certain  that  it  meant 
anything  more  than  voluntary  commen- 
dation, the  custom  mentioned  in  the 
former  part  of  this  chapter,  from  which 
the  vassal  might  depart  at  pleasure.  See, 
however.  Du  Cange,  v.  Honor,  where 
authorities  are  given  for  the  existence  of 
Castilian  fiefs  ;  and  I  have  met  with 
occasional  mention  of  them  in  history. 
I  believe  that  tenures  of  this  kind  were 
introduced  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries  ;  but  not  to  any  great  extent 
—  Marina,  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  iii.  p.  14 

Tenures  of  a  feudal  nature,  as  I  collect 
from  Freirii  Institut.  Juris  Lusitani,  torn, 
ii.  1. 1  and  3,  existed  in  Portugal,  though 
the  jealousy  of  the  crown  prevented  the 
system  from  being  established.  Ther« 
were  even  territorial  jurisdictions  in  thai 
kingdom,  though  not,  at  least  originallv 
in  Castile. 


188  NOBILITY.  CJiAr.   II.   I'Aiir   II 

political  effect.  Benefices  for  life  were  sometimes  -ranted  in 
the  kingdoms  of  Denmark  and  Bohemia.1  Neither  of  the-e, 
however,  nor  Sweden,  nor  Hungary,  come  under  the  descrip- 
tion of  countries  influenced  by  the  feudal  system.2  That 
system,  however,  after  all  these  limitations,  was  so  extensively 
diffused,  that  it  might  produce  confusion  as  well  as  prolixity 
to  pursue  collateral  branches  of  its  history  in  all  the  countries 
where  it  prevailed.  But  this  embarrassment  may  he  avoided 
without  any  loss,  I  trust,  of  important  information.  The 
English  constitution  will  find  its  place  in  another  portion  of 
these  volumes  ;  and  the  political  condition  of  Italy,  after  the 
eleventh  century,  was  not  much  affected,  except  in  the  king- 
dom of  Naples,  by  the  laws  of  feudal  tenure.  I  shall  confine 
myself,  therefore,  chiefly  to  France  and  Germany  ;  and  far 
more  to  the  former  than  the  latter  country.  But  it  may  be 
expedient  first  to  contemplate  the  state  of  society  in  its  various 
classes  during  the  prevalence  of  feudal  principles,  before  we 
trace  their  influence  upon  the  national  government. 

It  has  been  laid  down  already  as  most  probable  that  no 
Classes  of  proper  aristocracy,  except  that  of  wealth,  was 
Society.  known  under  the  early  kings  of  France  ;   and  it 

Nobility.  was  hinted  that  hereditary  benefices,  or,  in  other 
words,  fiefs,  might  supply  the  link  that  was  wanting  between 
personal  privileges  and  those  of  descent.  The  possessors  of 
beneficiary  estates  were  usually  the  richest  and  most  con- 
spicuous individuals 'in  the  estate.  They  were  immediately 
connected  with  the  crown,  and  partakers  in  the  exercise  of 
justice  and  royal  counsels.  Their  sons  now  came  to  inherit 
this  eminence  ;  and,  as  fiefs  were  either  inalienable,  or  at 
least  not  very  frequently  alienated,  rich  families  were  kept 
long  in  sight;  and,  whether  engaged  in  public  affairs,  or  living 
with  magnificence  and  hospitality  at  home,  naturally  drew  to 
themselves  popular  estimation.  The  dukes  and  counts,  who 
had  changed  their  quality  of  governors  into  that  of  lords  over 

l  Daniae  regni  politicus status.    Elzevir,  this   does   not   in    the   least  imply  that 

1629.     Stransky,  Respublica   Bohemica,  lands  in  Denmark  proper  were  feudal,  of 

lb.  Inoneof  the.  oldest  Danish  historians,  which  I  find  no  evidence. 

•no,  I   have  noticed  this  expression  :         -  Though  there  were  no  feudal  tenures 

Waldemarus,  patris  tunc  potitus  feodo.  in  Sweden,  yet  the   nobility  and  others 

Langebek,  Scrip,  Rerum  Dauic.t.  i.  p.  62.  were  exempt  from  taxes  on  condition  of 

By  this  he  means  the  duchy  of  Slcswic,  serving  the  king  wit!:  a  horse  and  arms 

not  a  fief,  hut  an  honor  or  government  at  their  own  expense  ;  and  a  distinction 

posses  e  i  t>v  Waldemar.   Saxo  Grammat-  was  taken  between  liber  and  tributariu* 

icus  calls  it.  more  classically,   paternae  But  any  one  of  the  latter  might  become 

praefectnrai    dignitas.     Sleswic  was,  in  ofthe  former  class,  or  vice  versa.  —  Sueci* 

Utter  times,  sometimes  held  as  a  flef;  but  descriptio      Klzevir,  1631,  p.  92 


Feudal  System.  NOBILITY.  18U 

the  provinces  intrusted  to  them,  were  at  the  head  of  this 
noble  class.  Ar  d  in  imitation  of  them,  their  own  vassals,  as 
well  as  those  of  the  crown,  and  even  rich  alodialists,  assumed 
titles  from  their  towns  or  castles,  and  thus  arose  a  number  of 
petty  counts,  barons,  and  viscounts.  This  distinct  class  of 
nobility  became  coextensive  with  the  feudal  tenures.1  For 
the  military  tenant,  however  poor,  was  subject  to  no  tribute ; 
no  prestation,  but  service  in  the  field ;  he  was  the  companion 
of  his  lord  in  the  -ports  and  feasting  of  his  castle,  the  peer  of 
his  court ;  he  fought  on  horseback,  he  was  clad  in  the  coat  of 
mail,  while  the  commonalty,  if  summoned  at  all  to  war,  came 
on  foot,  and  with  no  armor  of  defence.  As  everything  in  the 
habits  of  society  conspired  with  that  prejudice  which,  in  spite 
of  moral  philosophers,  will  constantly  raise  the  profession  of 
arms  above  all  others,  it  was  a  natural  consequence  that  a 
new  species  of  aristocracy,  founded  upon  the  mixed  consider- 
ations of  birth,  tenure,  and  occupation,  sprung  out  of  the 
feudal  system.  Every  possessor  of  a  fief  was  a  gentleman, 
though  he  owned  but  a  few  acres  of  land,  and  furnished  his 
slender  contribution  towards  the  equipment  of  a  knight.  In 
the  Libri  Feudorum,  indeed,  those  who  were  three  degrees 
removed  from  the  emperor  in  order  of  tenancy  are  considered 
as  ignoble  ;  2  but  this  is  restrained  to  modern  investitures  ;  and 
in  France,  where  subinfeudation  was  carried  the  farthest,  no 
such  distinction  has  met  my  observation.8 

There  still,  however,  wanted  something  to  ascertain  gentili- 
ty of  blood  where  it  was  not  marked  by  the  actual  tenure  of 
land.  This  was  supplied  by  two  innovations  devised  in  the 
eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  —  the  adoption  of  surnames 
and  of  armorial  bearings.  The  first  are  commonly  referred 
to  the  former  age,  when  the  nobility  began  to  add  the  names 
of  their  estates  to  their  own.  or,  having  any  way  acquired  a 
distinctive  appellation,  transmitted  it  to  their  posterity.4     As 

i  M.   Guerard    observes    that    in  the  2  L.  ii.  t.  10. 
Ohartulary  of  Chartres,  exhibiting  the  3  The  nobility  of  an  alodial  possession, 
usages    of   the  eleventh  and  beginning  in   France,   depended  upon  its  right  to 
of  the  twelfth  centuries,  "  La  nobles.se  territorial    jurisdiction.       llence     there 
s'y    montre  completement    constitutes  ;  were  franc-alevx  nobles  and  franc-alt uiJ 
e'est  a  dire,   privilegiee  et  her<iditaire.  roturiers;  the  latter  of  which  were  sub- 
file peut  etre  divisee  en  haute,  nioyeune,  ject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  neighbor- 
et   basse. "     By  the  first  he  understands  inglord.   Loiseau,  TraiU-  cfes  Seigneurles, 
those  who  held  immediately  of  the  crown;  p.  76.    Denisart,  Dictionnaire   des  Deci- 
the  middle  nobility  were  mediate  vassals,  sions,  art.  Fraue-aleu. 
but  had  rights  of  jurisdiction,  which  the  4  Mabillon,   Traite    de    Diplomatique 
lower    had     not.      (I'rolegomenes    a   la  1   ii.  c,  7.     The  authors  of  the  Noi 
Cartulaire    de   Chartres,  p.  30.)  Traite    de    Diplomatique,  t.  ii     p.    563 


190 


NOBILITY. 


Chat.  II.  Part.  II 


to  armorial  bearings,  there  is  no  doubt  that  emblems  some- 
what similar  have  been  immemorially  usid  both  in  war  and 
peace.  The  shields  of  ancient  warriors,  and  devices  upon 
coins  or  seals,  bear  no  distant  resemblance  to  modern  blazon- 
ry. But  the  general  introduction  of  such  bearing-,  as 
hereditary  distinctions,  has  been  sometimes  attributed  to  tour- 
naments, wherein  the  champions  were  distinguished  by  fanci- 
ful devices  ;  sometimes  to  the  crusades,  where  a  multitude  of 
all  nations  and  languages  stood  in  need  of  some  visible  token 
to  denote  the  banners  of  their  respective  chiefs.  In  fact,  the 
peculiar  symbols  of  heraldry  point  to  both  these  sources,  and 
have  been  borrowed  in  part  from  each.1  Hereditary  arms 
were  perhaps  scarcely  used  by  private  families  before  the 
beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.2  From  that  time,  how- 
ever, they  became  very  general,  and  have  contributed  to 
elucidate  that  branch  of  history  which  regards  the  descent  of 
illustrious  families. 


trace  the  use  of  surnames  in  a  few  in- 
stances even  to  the  beginning  of  the 
tenth  century  ;  but  they  did  not  become 
general,  according  to  them,  till  the  thir- 
teenth. 

M.  Guerard  finds  a  few  heredit  irv  sur- 
names in  the  eleventh  century  and  many 
tbat  were  personal.  (Cartulaire  de  Char- 
fcres,  p.  93.)  The  latter  are  not  surnames 
at  all,  in  our  usual  sense.  A  good  many 
may  be  found  in  Domesday,  as  that  of 
Burdet  in  Leicestershire,  Malet  in  Suf- 
folk, Corbet  in  Shropshire,  Colville  in 
Yorkshire,  besides  those  with  de,  which 
of  course  is  a  local  designation,  but  be- 
came hereditary. 

1  Mem  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscriptions,  t. 
xx.  p.  579. 

2  I  should  be  unwilling  to  make  a 
negative  assertion  peremptorily  in  a  mat- 
ter of  mere  antiquarian  research  ;  but,  I 
im  not  aware  of  any  decisive  evidence 
that  hereditary  arms  were  borne  in  the 
twelfth  century,  except  by  a  ver\'  few 
royal  or  almost';  royal  families.  Mabil- 
lou,  Traite  de  Diplomatique,  1.  ii.  c.  18. 
Those  of  Geoffrey  the  Fair,  count  of 
Anjou,  who  died  in  1150.  are  extant  on 
his  shield  ;  azure,  four  lions  rampant  or. 
Hist.  Litteraire  de  la  France,  t.  ix.  p. 
165.  If  arms  had  been  considered  as 
hereditary  at  that   time,  this  should  be 

ring  of  England,  which,  as  we  all 
know,  differs  considerably.  Louis  VII. 
Sprinkled  his  seal  and  coin  with  fieurs-de- 
1\  s.  a  very  ancient  device  or  rather  orna- 
ment, and  the  same  as  what  are  some- 
times called  bees.   The  golden  ornarueote 


found  in  the  tomb  of  Childeric  I.  at 
Tournay,  which  may  be  seen  in  the 
library  of  Paris,  may  pass  either  for 
fleurs-de-lys  or  bees.  Charles  V.  reduced 
the  number  to  three,  and  thus  fixed  the 
arms  of  France.  The  counts  of  Tou- 
louse used  their  cross  in  the  twelfth  age  : 
but  no  other  arms.  Vaissette  tells  us,  can 
be  traced  in  Languedoc  so  far  back.  T. 
iii.  p.  514. 

Armorial  bearings  were  in  use  among 
the  Saracens  during  the  later  crusades  ; 
as  appears  by  a  passage  in  Joinville,  t.  i 
p.  88  (Collect,  des  Memoires),  and  Du 
Cange's  note  upon  it.  Perhaps,  however, 
they  may  have  been  adopted  in  imitation 
of  the  Franks,  like  the  ceremoi  i 
knighthood.  Villaiet  ingeuiously  con 
jectures  that  the  separation  of  different 
branches  of  the  same  family  by  their 
settlements  in  Palestine  led  to  the  use  of 
hereditary  arms,  in  order  to  pieserve  the 
connection.     T.  xi.  p.  113- 

-M.  Sismondi,  I  observe,  seems  to  enter 
tain  !io  doubt  that  the  noble  families  of 
Pisa,  including  that  whose  name  he  bears. 
bad  their  armorial  distinctions  in  the 
beginning  of  the  twelfth  century.  Hist, 
des  Repub.  Ital.  t.  i.  p.  373.  It  is  at 
least  probable  that  the  heraldic  devices 
were  as  ancient  in  Italy  as  in  any  part  of 
Europe.  And  the  authors  of  Nouveau 
Traite  de  Diplomatique,  t.  iv  p,  .. 
cline  to  refer  hereditary  arms  even  in 
France  to  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth 
century,  though  without  producing  any 
evidence  for  this. 


Feudal  Svtstem.  ITS  PRIVILEGES.  19  J 

When  the  privileges  of  birth  had  thus  been  rendered  ca 
pable  of  legitimate  proof,  they  were  enhanced  in  a  Its  priTi 
great  degree,  and  a  line  drawn  between  the  high-  leses- 
born  and  ignoble  classes,  almost  as  broad  as  that  which  sepa 
rated  liberty  from  servitude.  All  offices  of  trust  and  powei 
were  conferred  on  the  former  ;  those  excepted  which  apper- 
tain to  the  legal  profession.  A  plebeian  could  not  possess  a 
fief.1  Such  at  least  was  the  original  strictness:  but  as  the 
aristocratic  principle  grew  weaker,  an  indulgence  was  ex- 
tended to  heirs,  and  afterwards  to  purchasers.'2  They  were 
even  permitted  to  become  noble  by  the  acquisition,  or  at  least 
by  its  possession  for  three  generations.3  But  notwithstanding 
this  ennobling  quality  of  the  laud,  which  seems  rather  of  an 
equivocal  description,  it  became  an  established  right  of  the 
crown  to  take,  every  twenty  years,  and  on  every  change  of 
the  vassal,  a  fine,  known  by  the  name  of  franc-fief,  from 
plebeians  in  possession  of  land  held  by  a  noble  tenure.4  A 
gentleman  in  France  or  Germany  could  not  exercise  any 
trade  without  derogating,  that  is,  losing  the  advantages  of  his 
rank.  A  few  exceptions  were  made,  at  least  in  the  former 
country,  in  favor  of  some  liberal  arts,  and  of  foreign  com- 
merce.5 But  in  nothing  does  the  feudal  haughtiness  of  birth 
more  show  itself  than  in  the  disgrace  which  attended  unequal 
marriages.  No  children  could  inherit  a  territory  held  im- 
mediately of  the  empire  unless  both  their  parents  belonged  to 
the  higher  cla>s  of  nobility.  In  France  the  offspring  of  a 
gentleman  by  a  plebeian  mother  weic  reputed  noble  for  the 

i  We  have  no  English  word  that  con-  See  also  preface  to  the  same  volume,  p. 

veys    the   full   sense  of  roturier.      How  xii.     According  to  Mably,  the  possession 

glorious  is  this  deficiency  in  our  political  of  a  fief  did  not  cease  to  confer  nobiliiy 

lauguage,  and  how  different  are  the  ideas  (analogous  to  our  barony  by  tenure)  tilj 

suggested  by  commoner!    Boturier.  ac-  the  Ordonnances  des  Blois  in  1579.     Ob- 

cording  to  Du   Cange,  is    derived    from  serrations  sur  l'Hist.  de  France,  1.  iii.c.  1 

rupturarius.  a  peasant,  ab  agruin  rum-  note  6.     But  Lauriere,  author  of  the  pre 

pendo.  face   above  cited,  refers  to  Bouteiller;  ■* 

2  The  Establishments  of  St.  Louis  for-  writer  of  the  fourteenth  century,  to  prove 
bid  this  innovation,  but  Beaumanoir  that  no  one  could  become  noble  without 
contends  that  the  prohibition  does  not  the  king's  authority.  The  contradiction 
extend  to  descent  or  marriage,  c.  48.  The  will  not  much  perplex  us,  when  we  re- 
roturier  who  acquired  a  6ef,  if  he  chal-  fleet  on  the  disposition  of  lawyers  to  as- 
lenged  any  one,  fought  with  ignoble  cribe  all  prerogatives  to  the  crown,  at 
arms;  but  in  all  other  respects  was  rhe  expense  of  territorial  proprietors  and 
treated  as  a  gentleman.     Ibid.     Yet    a  of  ancient  customary  law. 

fcnight  was  not  obliged  to  do  homage  to  *  The  right,  originally  perhaps  usurpa- 

the  roturier  who  became  his  superior  by  tion,  called  franc  fief,  began  under  Philip 

the  acquisition  of  a  fief  on  which  he  de-  the  Fair.     Ordonnances  des  Hois,  t.  i.  p. 

pended.     Carpentier,  Supplement,  ad  Du  324;  Denisart,  art.  Franc-fief. 

Cange,  voc.  Homagium.    *  5  Houard,   Diet,    du    Droit    Normand 

3  Etablissemens  de  St.  Louis,  c.  143,  Encyclopedic,  art  Noblesse.  Argou.  I 
vr  i  note,  in  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  i.  ii.  c.  2. 


192  NOBILITY.  Chap.  II.  Pakx  II. 

purposes  of  inheritance  and  of  exemption  from  tribute.1  But 
they  couid  not  be  received  into  any  order  of  chivalry,  though 
capable  of  simple  knighthood ;  nor  were  they  considered  as 
any  better  than  a  bastard  class  deeply  tainted  with  the  alloy  of 
their  maternal  extraction.  Many  instances  occur  where  let- 
ters of  nobility  have  been  granted  to  reinstate  them  in  their 
rank.2  For  several  purposes  it  was  necessary  to  prove  tour, 
eight,  sixteen,  or  a  greater  number  of  quarters,  that  is,  of 
coats  borne  by  paternal  and  maternal  ancestors,  and  the  same 
practice  still  subsists  in  Germany.3 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  original  nobility  of  the  Con- 
tinent were  what  we  may  call  self-created,  and  did  not  derive 
their  rank  from  any  such  concessions  of  their  respective  sov- 
ereigns as  have  been  necessary  in  subsequent  ages.  In  Eng- 
land the  baronies  by  tenure  might  belong  to  the  same  class,  if 
the  lands  upon  which  they  depended  had  not  been  granted  by 
the  crown.  But  the  kings  of  France,  before  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  began  to  assume  a  privilege  of  creating 
nobles  by  their  own  authority,  and  without  regard  to  the  ten- 
ure of  land.  Philip  the  Hardy,  in  1271,  was  the  first  French 
king  who  granted  letters  of  nobility ;  under  the  reigns  of 
Philip  the  Fair  and  his  children  they  gradually  became  fre- 
quent.4 This  effected  a  change  in  the  character  of  nobility, 
and  had  as  obvious  a  moral,  as  other  events  of  the  same  age 
had  a  political,  influence  in  diminishing  the  power  and  inde- 
pendence of  the  territorial  aristocracy.  The  privileges  orig- 
inally connected  with  ancient  lineage  and  extensive  domains 
became  common  to  the  low-born  creatures  of  a  court,  and  lost 
consequently  part  of  their  title  to  respect.  The  lawyers,  as 
I  have  observed  above,  pretended  that  nobility  could  not 
exist  without  a  royal  concession.  They  acquired  themselves, 
in  return  for  their  exaltation  of  prerogative,  an  official  nobil- 
ity by  the  exercise  of  magistracy.  The  institutions  of  chiv- 
alry again  gave  rise  to  a  vast  increase  of  gentlemen,  knight- 

i  Nobility,   to  a  certain    degree,   was  gentility  from  the  father,  and  of  freedom 

communicated  through  the  mother  alone,  from  the  mother. 

:iot  only  by  the  custom  of  Champagne,  2  Beaumauoir,  c.  45  ;  Du  Cange,  Dis- 

tiut  in  all  parts  of  France;  that  is,  the  sert.  10,  sur  Joinville;  Carpentier  voc 

issue  were  "  gentilhommes  du  fait  de  leur  Nobilitatio. 

corps."  and  could  possess  fiefs  ;  but,  says  3  [Note  XII.] 

Bcaumanoir,  "  la  gentilesse  par  laquelle  4  Velly,  t.  vi.  p.  432  ;   Du   Cange  and 

on  devieut  chevalier  doit  venir  de  par  le  Carpentier,  voce   Nobilitaire,  &c. ;  Bou- 

pere."   c.   45.     There   was  a  proverbial  lainvilliers,  llist.  de  rAucien  Gouverne- 

maxim  in   French  law.  rather  emphatic  ment  de  France,  t.  i.  p.  317. 
than  decent,  to  express  the  derivation  of 


Fkudal  System.  DIFFERENT  ORDERS.  193 

hood,  on  whomsoever  conferred  by  the  sovereign,  being  a 
sufficient  passport  to  noble  privilege-.  It  was  usual,  perhaps, 
to  grant  previous  letters  of  nobility  to  a  plebeian  for  whom  the 
honor  of  knighthood  was  designed. 

In  this  noble  or  gentle  class  there  were  several  gradations. 
All  those  in  France  who  held  lands  immediately  depending 
upon  the  crown,  whatever  titles  they  might  bear,  were  com 
prised  in  the  order  of  barons.     These  were  origi-  Different 
nally  the  peers  of  the  king's  court ;  they  possessed  <^ir1-tof 
the  higher  territorial  jurisdiction,  and  had  the  right 
of  carrying  their  own  banner  into  the  field.      To  these  cor- 
responded  the  Valvassores  majores  and  Capitanei  of  the  em- 
pire.    In   a  subordinate   elass  were  the  vassals  of  this  high 
nobility,  who,  upon  the  Continent,  were  usually  termed  Va- 
vassors  —  an  appellation  not  unknown,  though  rare,  in  Eng- 
land.2    The  Chatelains  belonged  to  the  order  of  Vavassors, 
as  they  held  only  arriere  liefs ;  but,  having  fortified  houses, 
from  which  they  derived  their  name  (a  distinction  very  im- 
portant in  those  times),  and  possessing  ampler  rights  of  terri- 
torial justice,  they  rose  above  the  level  of  their  fellows  in  the 
scale  of  tenure.3     But  after  the  personal  nobility  of  chivalry 

l  Beaumanoir,  c.  34;  Dii  Cange,  v.  scription  of  the  Franklin,  in  the  prologiu 
Baro;  Etahlissemens  de  St.  Louis,  1.  i.  to  the  Canterbury  Tales,  thus:  — 
c.  24,  1.  ii.  e.  36.  The  vassals  of  inferior  "  Was  never  such  a  worthy  vavassor.' 
lords  were,  however,  called,  improperly.  This  has  perplexed  some  of  our  com 
Barons,  both  in  France  and  England',  mentators.  who.  not  knowing  well  what 
Recueil  des  Historiens,  t.  xi.  p.  300;  was  meant  by  a  franklin  or  by  a  vavassor, 
Madox,  Baronia  Anglica,  p.  133.  In  fancied  the  latter  to  be  of  much  higher 
perfect  strictness,  those  only  whose  im-  quality  than  the  former.  The  poet,  how- 
mediate  tenure  of  the  crown  was  older  ever,  was  strictly  correct ;  his  acquaint 
than  the  accession  of  Hugh  Capet  were  ance  with  French  manners  showed  him 
barons  of  France  ;  namely,  Bourbon,  that  the  country  squire,  for  his  franklin 
Coucy.  aud  Beaujeu,  or  Beaujolois.  It  is  no  other,  precisely  corresponded  to  the 
appears,  however,  by  a  register  in  the  vavassor  in  France.  Those  who,  having 
reign  of  Philip  Augustus,  that  fifty -nine  been  deceived,  by  comparatively  modern 
were  reckoned  in  That  class  ;  the  feuda-  law-books,  into  a  notion  that  the  word 
taries  of  the  Capetian  fiefs,  Paris  and  franklin  denoted  but  a  stout  yeoman,  in 
Orleans  being  confounded  with  the  ori-  spite  of  the  wealth  <*nd  rank  which 
ginal  vassals  of  the  crown.  Du  Cange,  Chaucer  assigns  to  him.  aud  believing 
voc    Baro.  also,  on  the  authority  of  the  loose  phrase 

-  Du  Cange,  v.  Vavassor  ;  Velly  t.  vi.  in    Bracton,     that    all    vavassors     were 

p.  151;  Madox,  Baronia  Anglica,"  p.  135.  "magna  dignitatis  viri,"  might  well  be 

There  is,  perhaps,  hardly  any  word  more  puzzled  at  seeing  the  words  employed  as 

loosely  used    than    Vavassor.      Bracton  synonyms.     See   Todd's  Illustrations  of 

says,  Sunt  etiam  Vavassores,  magnse  dig-  Gower  and  Chaucer  for  an  instance, 
nitatis  viri.     In   France    and   Germany        3  Du  Cange.  v.  Castellanus  :  Cofitumes 

they  are  sometimes  named  with   much  de  Poitou,  tit     iii.;    Lotseau  Traite  des 

less  honor.    Je  suis  uu  chevalier  mi  de  Seigneuries,  p.  160.    Whoever  had  aright 

cest  part,  de  vavasseurs  et  de  basse  gent,  to  a  castle  had  la  haute  justice  ;  this  be- 

Rays  a  romance.     This  is  to  be  explained  ing  so  incident   to  the  castle,  that  it  was 

by  the  poverty  to  which  the  subdivision  transferred  along  with  it.     There  might, 

of  fiefs  reduced  idle  gentlemen.  however,  be  a  Seigneur  haut-justicier  be 

Chaucer  concludes  his  picturesque  de-  low  the  Chatelain  :  and  a  ridiculous  dis- 
VOL.  I  —  M.                       13 


194  CLERGY.  Chap.  II.  Paw  II 

became  the  object  of  pride,  the  Vavassors  who  obtained  knight- 
hood were  commonly  styled  bachelors ;  those  who  had  not  re- 
ceived that  honor  fell  into  the  class  of  squires,1  or  damoiseaux. 
It  will  be  needless  to  dwell  upon  the  condition  of  the  infe- 
uiergy  r'or  c^erSy>  whether   secular   or   professed,  as   it 

bears  little  upon  the  general  scheme  of  polity. 
The  prelates,  and  abbots,  however,  it  must  be  understood, 
were  completely  feudal  nobles.  They  swore  fealty  for  their 
lands  to  the  king  or  other  superior,  received  the  homage 
of  their  vassals,  enjoyed  the  same  immunities,  exercised  the 
same  jurisdiction,  maintained  the  same  authority,  as  the  lay 
lords  among  whom  they  dwelt.  Military  service  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  reserved  in  the  beneficiary  grants  made 
to  cathedrals  and  monasteries.  But  when  other  vassals  of  the 
crown  were  called  upon  to  repay  the  bounty  of  their  sover- 
eign by  personal  attendance  in  war,  the  ecclesiastical  tenants 
were  supposed  to  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  feudal  duty, 
which  men  little  less  uneducated  and  violent  than  their  com- 
patriots were  not  reluctant  to  fulfil.  Charlemagne  exempted 
or  rather  prohibited  them  from  personal  service  by  several 
capitularies.2  The  practice,  however,  as  every  one  who  has 
some  knowlege  of  history  will  be  aware,  prevailed  in  succeed- 
ing ages.  Both  in  national  and  private  warfare  we  find  very 
frequent  mention  of  martial  prelates.3  But,  contrary  as  this 
actual  service  might  be  to  the  civil  as  well  as  ecclesiastical 

tinction  was  made  as  to  the  number  of  inter  Equitem  et  Generosum.     Quod  et 

posts  by  which   their  gallows  might  be  alibi  in  usu  fuit."     Squire  was  not  used 

supported.    A  baron's  instrument  of  exe-  as  a  title  of  distinction  in  England  till 

cution  stood  on  four  posts  ;  a  chatelain's  the  reign  of  Edward  III.,  and  then  but 

on  three;   while   the   inferior  lord   who  sparingly.     Though  b\  Henry  VI. "s  time 

happened  to  possess  la  haute  justice  was  it  was   grown   more  common,  yet  none 

forced  to  hang  his  subjects  on  a  two-  assumed  it  but   the  sons  and  heirs    of 

legged  machine.     Coutunies  de  Poitou ;  knights  and  some  military  men;  except 

Du  Cange,  v.  Furca.  officers  in  courts  of  justice,  who,  by  pa- 

Lauriere   quotes   from   an  old  manu-  tent  or  prescription,  had  obtained  that 

script  the  following  short  scale  of  ranks :  addition     Spelman's  Posthumcus  Works. 

Due  est  la  premiere  dignite,  puis  comtes,  p.  234:. 

puis  viscomtes,  et  puis  baron,  et  puis        -  Mably,  1.  i.  c.  5;  Baluze,  t.  i.  p.  410, 

chatelain,   et    puis    vavasseur,    et    puis  932,  987.     Any  bishop,  priest,  deacon,  or 

citaen,  et  puis  villain.     Ordonnances  des  subdeacon  bearing   arms  was   to  be  de 

Bote,  t.  i.  p.  277.  graded    and    not  even   admitted   to  lay 

1  The  sons  of  knights,  and  gentlemen  communion.     Id.  p.  932. 
not  yet  knighted,  took  the  appellation  of         8  One  of  the  latest,  instances  probably 

Bquiresin  the  twelfth  century.    Vaissette,  of  a  fighting  bishop   is  .loan  Moutaigu 

Hist,  de  Lang.  t.  ii.  p.  513.     That  of  Da-  archbishop  of  Sens,   who   was   killed  at 

moiseau  came  into  use  in  the  thirteenth.  Azincourt.     Monstrelet  says  that  lie  was 

Id.  t.  iii.  p.  529.    The  latter  was,  1  think,  "  oon  pas  en  estat  pontifical,  car  an  lieu 

more  usual  in  France.     Du  Cange  gives  de  mitre  il  portoit  nne  bacinet,  pour  dal- 

little  information  as  to  the  word  squire,  matique    portoit    uu  haubergeon,    poui 

(Scutifer.)     "  Apud   Anglos,"    he    says,  chasuble  la  piece  d'acier ;  et  au  lieu  d« 

"penulthna    est    nobilitatis   descriptio,  crosse,  portoit  une  hache."     Fol.  182 


Feudal  System.  FREEMEN.  J  93 

laws,  the  clergy  who  held  military  fiefs  were  of  course  bound 
to  fulfil  the  chief  obligation  of  that  tenure  and  send  their 
vassals  into  rhe  field.  We  have  many  instances  of  their  ac- 
companying the  army,  though  not  mixing  in  the  conflict ;  and 
even  the  parish  priests  headed  the  mihtia  of  their  villages.1 
The  prelates,  however,  sometimes  contrived  to  avoid  this  mili 
tary  service,  and  the  payments  introduced  in  commutation  for 
it,  by  holding  lands  in  frank-almoigne,  a  tenure  which  ex- 
empted them  from  every  species  of  obligation  except  that  of 
saying  masses  for  the  benefit  of  the  grantor's  family.2  But, 
notwithstanding  the  warlike  disposition  of  some  ecclesiastics, 
then-  more  usual  inability  to  protect  the  estates  of  their 
churches  against  rapacious  neighbors  suggested  a  new  spe- 
cies of  feudal  relation  and  tenure.  The  rich  abbeys  elected 
an  advocate,  whose  business  it  was  to  defend  their  interests 
both  in  secular  courts  and,  if  necessary,  in  the  field.  Pepin 
and  Charlemagne  are  styled  Advocates  of  the  Roman  church. 
This,  indeed,  was  on  a  magnificent  scale  ;  but  in  ordinary 
practice  the  advocate  of  a  monastery  was  some  neighboring 
lord,  who,  in  return  for  his  protection,  possessed  many  lucra- 
tive privileges,  and  very  frequently  considerable  estates  by 
way  of  fief  from  his  ecclesiastical  clients.  Some  of  these 
advocates  are  reproached  with  violating  their  obligation,  and 
becoming  the  plunderers  of  those  whom  they  had  been  re- 
tained to  defend.3 

The  classes  below  the  gentry  may  be  divided  into  freemen 
and  villeins.  Of  the  first  were  the  inhabitants  of  chartered 
towns,  the  citizens  and  burghers,  of  whom  more  will  be  said 
presently.  As  to  those  who  dwelt  in  the  country,  we  can 
have  no  difficulty  in  recognizing,  so  far  as  England  is  con- 
cerned, the  socagers,  whose  tenure  was  free,  though  not  so 
noble  as  knight's  service,  and  a  numerous  body  of  tenants 
for  term  of  life,  who  formed  that  ancient  basis  of  our  strength 
the  English  yeomanry.  But  the  mere  freemen  are  not  at 
first  sight  so  distinguishable  in  other  countries-  In  French 
records  and  law-books  of  feudal  times,  all  besides  the  gen- 
try are  usually  confounded  under  the  names  of  villeins  or 
hommes  de  pooste  (gens  potestatis).4     This  proves  the  slight 

i  Daniel,  Hist,  de  la  Milice  Franchise,  3  Du  Cange,  v.  Actvocatus  ;  a  full  and 

t.  i.  p.  88.  useful  article.     Recueil  des  Historien?, 

2  Du     Cange,     Eleemosyua     Libera  ;  t.  xi.  preface,  p.  184. 

Madox,  Baronia  Angl.  p.  115;  Coke  on  *  Homo  potestatis,  non    nobilis  —  Ita 

Littleton,  and  other  English  law-books.  nuncupantur,  quod  in  potestate  doiniui 


196  SERFS   OR  VILLEINS.       Chai>.   "J.  Part  II 

estimation  in  which  all  persons  of  ignoble  birth  were  consider- 
ed. For  undoubtedly  there  existed  a  great  many  proprietors 
of  land  and  others,  as  free,  though  not  as  privileged,  as  the  no- 
bility. In  the  south  of  France,  and  especially  Provence,  the 
number  of  freemen  is  remarked  to  have  been  greater  than  in 
the  parts  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Loire,  where  the  feudal 
tenures  were  almost  universal.1  I  shall  quote  part  of  a  pas- 
sage in  Beauinanoir,  which  points  out  this  distinction  of  ranks 
pretty  fully.  "It  should  be  known,"  he  says,2  "that  there 
are  three  conditions  of  men  in  this  world;  the  first  is  that 
of  gentlemen ;  and  the  second  is  that  of  such  as  are  naturally 
free,  being  born  of  a  free  mother.  All  who  have  a  right  to 
be  called  gentlemen  are  free,  but  all  who  are  free  are  not 
gentlemen.  Gentility  comes  by  the  father,  and  not  by  the 
mother ;  but  freedom  is  derived  from  the  mother  only ;  and 
whoever  is  born  of  a  free  mother  is  himself  free,  and  has  free 
power  to  do  anything  that  is  lawful." 8 

In  every  age  and  country  until  times  comparatively  recent, 
serfs  or  personal  servitude  appears  to  have  been  the  lot 
villeins.  0f  a  iarge)  perhaps  the  greater,  portion  of  man- 

kind. We  lose  a  good  deal  of  our  sympathy  with  the  spirit 
of  freedom  in  Greece  and  Rome,  when  the  importunate  rec- 
ollection occurs  to  us  of  the  tasks  which  might  be  enjoined, 
and  the  punishments  which  might  be  inflicted,  without  control 
either  of  law  or  opinion,  by  the  keenest  patriot  of  the  Comitia, 
or  the  Council  of  Five  Thousand.  A  similar,  though  less 
powerful,  feeling  will  often  force  itself  on  the  mind  when  we 
read  the  history  of  the  middle  ages.  The  Germans,  in  their 
primitive  settlements,  were  accustomed  to  the  notion  of 
slavery,  incurred  not  only  by  captivity,  but  by  crimes,  by 
debt,  and  especially  by  loss  in  gaming.  When  they  invaded 
the  Roman  empire  they  found  the  same  condition  established 
in  all  its  provinces.  Hence,  from  the  beginning  of  the  era 
now  under  review,  servitude,  under  somewhat  different  modes, 
was  extremely  common.  There  is  some  difficulty  in  ascer- 
taining its  varieties  and  stages.     In  the  Salic  laws,  and  in  the 

sunt  --  Opponuntur  viris  nobilibus  ;  apud  to  many  tributes  and  oppressive  claim*" 

Butilerium    Consuetudinarii     vocantur,  on  the  part  of  their  territorial  superiors. 

Coustumiers,  prestationibus  scilicet  ob-  we  cannot  be  surprised  that  they  are  com- 

noxii  et  operis.     Du  Cange,  v.  Potestas.  founded,  at  this  distance,  with  men  in 

As  all  these  freemen  were  obliged,  by  the  actual  servitude. 

ancient  laws  of  France,  to  live  under  the  '  lleeren,     Bssai    wax    les     Croisades 

protection  of  some  particular  lord,  and  p.  122. 

found  great  difficulty  in  choosiug  a  new  -  Coutumea  de  Beauvoisfa,  c.  45,  p.  2W5 

Dlace  of  residence,  as   they  were  subject  3  [Note  XI I ! .  1 


Feudal  System.  SERFS  OR  VILLEINS.  197 

Capitularies,  we  read  not  only  of  Servi,  but  of  Tributarii, 
Lidi,  and  Coloni,  who  were  cultivators  of  the  earth  and  sub- 
ject to  residence  upon  their  lord's  estate,  though  not  destitute 
of  property  or  civil  rights.1  Those  who  appertained  to  the 
demesne  lands  of  the  crown  were  called  Fiscalini.  The  com- 
position for  the  murder  of  one  of  these  was  much  less  than 
that  for  a  freeman.2  The  number  of  these  servile  cultivators 
was  undoubtedly  great,  yet  in  those  early  times,  I  should  con- 
ceive, much  less  than  it  afterwards  became.  Property  was 
for  the  most  part  in  small  divisions,  and  a  Frank  who  could 
hardly  support  his  family  upon  a  petty  alodial  patrimony  was 
not  likely  to  encumber  himself  with  many  servants.  But  the 
accumulation  of  overgrown  private  wealth  had  a  natural  ten- 
dency to  make  slavery  more  frequent.  Where  the  small  pro- 
prietors lost  their  lands  by  mere  rapine,  we  may  believe  that 
their  liberty  was  hardly  less  endangered.3  Even  where  this 
was  not  the  case,  yet,  as  the  labor  either  of  artisans  or  of  free 
husbandmen  was  but  sparingly  in  demand,  they  were  often 
compelled  to  exchange  their  liberty  for  bread.4  In  seasons 
also  of  famine,  and  they  were  not  unfrequent,  many  freemen 
sold  themselves  to  slavery.  A  capitulary  of  Charles  the 
Bald  in  864  permits  their  redemption  at  an  equitable  price.5 
Others  became  slaves,  as  more  fortunate  men  became  vassals, 
to  a  powerful  lord,  for  the  sake  of  his  protection.  Many  were 
reduced  into  this  state  through  inability  to  pay  those  pe- 
cuniary compositions  for  offences  which  were  numerous  and 
sometimes  heavy  in  the  barbarian  codes  of  law ;  and  many 
more  by  neglect  of  attendance  on  military  expeditions  of  the 

i  These  passages  are  too  numerous  for  till  strict  inquiry  had  been  made  in  the 

reference.    In  a  very   early  charter  in  place  to  which  he  was  asserted  to  belong, 

Martenne's  Thesaurus  Anecdotorum,  t.  as  to  his  condition,  and  that  of  his  fam 

i.  p.  20,  lands  are  granted,  cum  homini-  ily  :  p.  400.     And  if  the  villein  showed  a 

bus  ibidem  permanentibus,  quos  colon-  charter  of   enfranchisement,  the   proof 

ario   online   vivere   constituimus.     Men  of  its  forgery  was  to  lie  upon  the  lord. 

of  this  class  were    called,  in   Italy,  Al-  No  man's  liberty  could  be  questioned  in 

diones.    A  Lombard  capitulary  of  Charle-  the  Hundred-court. 

magne  says,  Aldiones  ea  lege  vivunt  in  8  Montesquieu  ascribes  the  increase  of 
Italia  sub  servi tute  dominorum  suorum,  personal  servitude  in  France  to  the  con- 
qua  Fiscalini,  vel  Lidi  vivunt  in  Francia.  tinued  revolts  and  commotions  under  the 
Muratori,  Dissert.  14.     [Note  XIV.]  two  first  dynasties.  I.  xxx.  c.  11. 

2  Originally  it  was  but  45  solidi  4  Du  Cange,  v.  Obnoxatio. 
(Leges  Salicse,  c.  43),  but  Charlemagne  5  Baluzii  Capitularia.  The  Greek  trad- 
raised  it  to  100.  Baluzii  Capitularia,  p.  ers  purchased  famished  wretches  on  tho 
402.  There  are  several  provisions  in  the  coasts  of  Italy,  whom  they  sold  to  the 
laws  of  this  great  and  wise  monarch  in  Saracens. —  Muratori,  Annalia  d'ltalia, 
favor  of  liberty.  If  a  lord  claimed  any  a.d.  785.  Much  more  would  persons  in 
one  either  as  his  villein  or  slave  (colonus  this  extremity  sell  themselves  to  neigh 
sive  servus),  who  had  escaped  beyond  boring  lords, 
his  territory,  he  was  not  to  be  given  up 


198  SERFS   OR   VILLEINS.       Chap.  II.  Part    II. 

king,  the  penally  of  which  was  a  fine  called  Heribann,  with 
the  alternative  of  perpetual  servitude.1  A  -ouree  of  loss 
of  liberty  which  may  strike  us  as  more  extraordinary  was 
superstition ;  men  were  infatuated  enough  to  surrender  them- 
selves, as  well  as  their  properties,  to  churches  and  monaste- 
ries, in  return  for  such  benefits  as  they  might  reap  by  the 
prayers  of  their  new  masters.2 

The  characteristic  distinction  of  a  villein  was  his  obligation 
to  remain  upon  his  lord'.-  estate.  He  was  not  only  precluded 
from  selling  the  lands  upon  which  he  dwelt,  but  his  person 
was  bound,  and  the  lord  might  reclaim  him  at  any  time,  by 
suit  in  a  court  of  justice,  if  he  ventured  to  stray.  But, 
equally  liable  to  this  confinement,  there  were  two  classes 
of  villeins,  whose  condition  was  exceedingly  different.  In 
England,  at  least  from  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  one  only,  and 
that  the  inferior  species,  existed ;  incapable  of  property,  and 
destitute  of  redress,  except  against  the  most  outrageous 
injuries.3  The  lord  could  seize  whatever  they  acquired  or 
inherited,  or  convey  them,  apart  from  the  land,  to  a  stranger. 
Their  tenure  bound  them  to  what  were  called  villein  services, 
ignoble  in  their  nature,  and  indeterminate  in  their  degree; 
the  felling  of  timber,  the  carrying  of  manure,  the  repairing 
of  roads  for  their  lord,  who  seems  to  have  possessed  an 
equally  unbounded  right  over  their  labor  and  its  fruits.  But 
by  the  customs  of  France  and  Germany,  persons  in  this 
abject  state  seem  to  have  been  called  serfs,  and  distinguished 
from  villein-,  who  were  only  bound  to  fixed  payments  and 
duties  in  respect  of  their  lord,  though,  as  it  seems,  without 
any  legal  redress  if  injured  by  him.4  "  The  third  estate  of 
men,"  says  Beaumanoir,  in  the  passage  above  quoted,  "  is 
that  of  such  a>  are  not  free ;  and  these  are  not  all  of  one 
condition,  for  some  are  so  subject  to   their  lord  that  he  may 

i  Du  Cange,  Heribannum.    A  full  heri-  bien  que  selon  Dieu  tu  n'as  mie  pleniere 

bannum  was  60  solidi;  but  it  was  some-  poeste  sur  ton  vilain.     Dont  se  tu  prens 

times  assessed  in  proportion  to  tbe  wealth  du  sien  fors  les  droites  redevances  que 

of  the  party.  te  doit,  tu  lea  prens  contre  Dieu,  et  sur 

2  Beaumanoir,  c.  45.     [Note  XV.]  le  peril  de  fame  et  come  robierres.     Et 

3  Littleton,  1.  ii.  c.  11.  Nou  potest  ce  qu'on  dit  toutes  lea  choses  que  vilain  a 
aliquis  (says  Glanvil),  in  villenagio  posi-  a,  sont  son  Seigneur,  c'est  voir  a  garder. 
tus.  libertatem  suain  prppriia  denariis  Car  s'il  eatoient  bod  seigneur  propre,  il 
auis  quaere  —  quia  omnia  catalla  cu  n'avoit  mile  difference  entre  serf  et  vilain, 
juslibet  nativi  intelliguntur  ease  in  po-  mais  par  notre  usage  n'a  entre  toi  et  ton 
testate  domini  sui. —  1.  v.  c.  5.  vilain  juge  fors  Dieu,  taut  com  il  est  tea 

4  This  is  clearlj  expressed  in  a  French  couchans  et  tea  levans,  s'il  n'a  autre  loi 
law-book  of  the  thirteenth  century,  the  vers  toi  furs  la  commune.  This  seems 
Coneeil  of  Pierre  dee  Fontaines,  quoted  to  reuder  the  distinction  little  more  than 
by   Du  Cange,  voc.  Villanus.     Et  sache  theoretical 


Feudal  System.      ABOLITION  OF  VILLENAGE.  19& 

take  all  they  have,  alive  or  dead,  and  imprison  them,  when 
ever  he  pleases,  being  accountable  to  none  but  God ;  while 
others  are  treated  more  gently,  from  whom  the  lord  can  take 
nothing  but  customary  payments,  though  at  their  death  all 
they  have  escheats  to  him."1 

Under  every  denomination  of  servitude,  the  children 
followed  their  mother's  condition  ;  except  in  England,  where 
the  father's  state  determined  that  of  the  children ;  on  which 
account  bastards  of  female  villeins  were  born  free,  the  law 
presuming  the  liberty  of  their  father.2  The  pro-  General 
portion    of  freemen,   therefore,  would   have    been  abolition  of 

VlllGll£UrtJ. 

miserably  diminished  if  there"  had  been  no  reflux 
of  the  tide  which  ran  so  strongly  towards  slavery.  But  the 
usage  of  manumission  made  a  sort  of  circulation  between 
these  two  states  of  mankind.  This,  as  is  well  known,  was 
an  exceedingly  common  practice  with  the  Romans  ;  and  is 
mentioned,  with  certain  ceremonies  prescribed,  in  the  Frankish 
and  other  early  laws.  The  clergy,  and  especially  several 
popes,  enforced  it  as  a  duty  upon  laymen ;  and  inveighed 
against  the  scandal  of  keeping  Christians  in  bondage.3  A3 
society  advanced  in  Europe,  the  manumission  of  slaves  grew 
more   frequent.4       By    the    indulgence    of    custom    in    some 

1  Beaumanoir,  c.  45:  Du  Cange,  Vil-  holds  that  the  spurious  issue  of  a  neif, 
lanus,  Servus,  and  several  other  articles,  though  by  a  free  father,  should  be-  a  vii- 
Schmidt,  Hist,  des  Allemands,  t.  ii.  p.  lein,  quia  sequitur  conditionem  matris, 
171,  435.  By  a  law  of  the  Lombards,  a  quasi  vulgo  conceptus,  1.  i.  c.  6.  But 
free  woman  who  married  a  slave  might  the  laws  under  the  name  of  Henry  I. 
be  killed  by  her  relations,  or  sold ;  if  declare  that  a  sou  should  follow  hia 
they  neglected  to  do  so,  the  fisc  might  father's  condition;  so  that  this  peculiar- 
claim  her  as  its  own. — Muratori,  Dis-  ity  is  very  ancient  in  our  law.  — Leges 
sert.  14.     In  France  also  she  was  liable  Hen.  I.  c.  75  and  77. 

to  be  treated  as  a  slave.  —  Marc ulfi  For-        3  Enfranchisements  by  testament  are 

oiulae,  1.  ii.  29.    Even  in  the  twelfth  cen-  very  common.     Thus  in  the  will  of  Se- 

tury   it   was   the    law   of  Flanders   that  uiofred,  count  of  Barcelona,  in  9G6,  we 

whoever  married  a  villein   became   one  find  the  following  piece  of  corrupt  Latin  : 

himself  after  he   had  lived  with  her  a  De  ipsos  servos  meos  et  ancillas,  illi  qui 

twelvemonth  — Itecueil   des   Historiens,  traditi  fuerunt  faciatis  illos  libros  propter 

t.  xiii.  p.  350.     And,  by  a  capitulary  of  remedium  anioia3  meae;  et  alii  <jui  fue 

Pepiu,  if  a  man  married  a  viliein  believ-  runt  de  parentorum  meorum  remaneant 

lug  her  to  be  free,  he  might  repudiate  ad  fratres  meos. — Marca  Hispanica,  p 

her   and    marry    another.  —  Baluze,   p.  887. 

181.  4  No  one  could  enfranchise  his  villein 

Villeins  themselves  could   not  rnarry  without  the  superior  lord's  consent;  for 

without  the  lord's  license,  under  penalty  this  was    to  diminish   the  value   of  hia 

of  forfeiting  their  goods,  or  at  least  of  a  land,  apeticer  le  fief.  —  Beaumanoir,  c. 

mulct. — Du  Cange,  v.  Forismaritagium.  15.    Etablissemens  de  St.  Louis,  c.  34. 

This  seems  to  be  the  true  origin  of  the  It  was  necessary,  therefore,  for  the  villein 

famous  mercheta  mulierum,  which  has  to  obtain   the   suzerain's   confirmation  ; 

been  ascribed  to  a  very  different  custom,  otherwise  he  only  changed  masters  and 

—  Du   Cange,   v.    Mercheta    Mulierum;  escheated,  as  it  were,   to  the  superior- 

Dalrymple's  Annals  of  Scotland,  vol.  i.  for  the  lord  who  had  granted  the  charter 

p    312;  Archseologia,  vol.  xii.  p.  31.  of  franchise  wa3  estopped  from  claiming 

2  Littleton,   s.    188.      Bracton    indeed  him  again. 


200  ABOLITION  OF    VILLENAGE.    Chap.  II.  Part  II 

places,  or  perhaps  by  original  convention,  villeins  might 
possess  property,  and  thus  purchase  their  own  redemption. 
Even  where  they  had  no  legal  title  to  property,  it  was 
accounted  inhuman  to  divest  them  of  their  little  possession 
(the  peculium  of  Roman  law),  nor  was  their  poverty, -per- 
haps, less  tolerable,  upon  the  whole,  than  that  of  the  modern 
peasantry  in  most  countries  of  Europe.  It  was  only  hi 
respect  of  his  lord,  it  must  be  remembered,  that  the  villein, 
at  least  in  England,  was  without  rights ; x  he  might  inherit, 
purchase,  sue  in  the  courts  of  law;  though,  as  defendant  in 
a  real  action  or  suit  wherein  land  was  claimed,  he  might 
shelter  himself  under  the  plea  of  villenage.  The  peasants 
of  this  condition  wrere  sometimes  made  use  of  in  war,  and 
rewarded  with  enfranchisement ;  especially  in  Italy,  where 
the  cities  and  petty  states  had  often  occasioii  to  defend  them- 
seives  with  their  own  population ;  and  in  peace  the  industry 
of  free  laborers  must  have  been  found  more  productive  and 
better  directed.  Hence  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries 
saw  the  number  of  slaves  in  Italy  begin  to  decrease ;  early 
in  the  fifteenth  a  writer  quoted  by  Muratori  speaks  of  them 
as  no  longer  existing.2  The  greater  part  of  the  peasants  in 
some  countries  of  Germany  had  acquired  their  liberty  before 
the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century  ;  in  other  parts,  as  well  as 
in  all  the  northern  and  eastern  regions  of  Europe,  they  re- 
mained in  a  sort  of  villenage  till  the  present  age.  Some 
very  few  instances  of  predial  servitude  have  been  discovered 
in  England  so  late  as  the  time  of  Elizabeth,8  and  perhaps 
they  might  be  traced  still  lower.  Louis  Hutin,  in  France, 
after  innumerable  particular  instances  of  manumission  had 
taken  place,  by  a  general  edict  in  1315,  reciting  that  his 
kingdom  is  denominated  the  kingdom  of  the  Franks,  that  he 
would  have  the  fact  to  correspond  with  the  name,  emancipates 
all  persons  in  the  royal  domains  upon  paying  a  just  composi- 
tion, as  an   example    for    other    lords    possessing   villeins    to 

i  Littleton,  s.  189.     Perhaps  this  is  not  against  their  lord,  was  ever  refused  in 

applicable  to  other  countries.     Villeins  England;    their   state    of  servitude   not 

were  incapable  of  being  received  as  wit-  being  absolute,  like  that  of  negroes  in 

nesses    against    freemen.  —  Recueil    des  the  West  fndies.  but  particular  and  rela- 

Historiens,  t.  xiv.  preface,  p.  65.     There  tive,  as  that  of  an  apprentice  or  hired 

are  some  charters  of  kings  of  Frame  ad-  servant.     This  Bubject,  however,  is  not 

nutting  the  serfs   of  particular  monas-  devoid  of  obscurity. 

teries  to  give  evidence,  or  to  engage  in  '-  Dissert.  14. 

the  judicial  combat,  against  freemen.  —  :i  Harrington's  Observation*  on  the  An- 

OrdonnaiK-.-s  iea  ELois.  •;    i.  p.  3.     ButI  cientSt.ttu.tes,  p.  274. 
do  not  know  thit  tlieii  .fc«timony,  except 


Feudal  System. 


TENURES   Of  LANDS. 


20J 


follow.1  Philip  the  Long  renewed  the  same  edict  ihree 
years  afterwards;  a  proof  that  it  had  not  been  carried  into 
execution.2  Indeed  there  are  letters  of  the  former  prince, 
wherein,  considering  that  many  of  hi<  subjects  are  not  ap- 
prised of  the  extent  of  the  benefit  conferred  upon  them,  he 
directs  his  officers  to  tax  them  as  high  as  their  fortunes  can 
well  bear.3 

It  is  deserving  of  notice  that  a  distinction  existed  from  ve:y 
early  times  in  the  nature  of  lands,  collateral,  as  it  were,  to 
that  of  persons.  Thus  we  find  mansi  ingenui  and  mansi 
serviles  in  the  oldest  charters,  corresponding,  as  we  may  not 
unreasonably  conjecture,  to  the  liberum  tenementum  and  vil- 
lenagium,  or  freehold  and  copyhold  of  our  own  law.  In 
France,  all  lands  held  in  roture  appear  to  be  considered  as 
villein  tenements,  and  are  so  termed  in  Latin,  though  many 
of  them  rather  answer  to  our  socage  freeholds.  But  although 
originally  this  servile  quality  of  lands  was  founded  on  the 
state  of  their  occupiers,  yet  there  was  this  particularity,  that 


1  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  583. 

2  Id.  p.  653. 

3  Velly,  t.  viii.  p.  38.  Philip  the  Fair 
had  emancipated  the  villeins  iu  the  royal 
domains  throughout  Languedoc,  retain- 
ing only  an  annual  rent  for  their  lands, 
which  thus  became  censives,  or  empky- 
teuses.  It  does  not  appear  by  the  charter 
that  he  sold  this  enfranchisement,  though 
there  can  *)e  little  doubt  about  it.  He 
permitted  his  vassals  to  follow  the  ex- 
ample —  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc, 
t.  iv. ;  Appendix,  p.  3,  12. 

It  is  not  generally  known,  I  think, 
that  predial  servitude  was  not  abolished 
in  all  parts  of  France  till  the  revolution. 
In  some  places,  says  Pasquier,  the  peas- 
ants are  taillables  a  volonte,  that  is,  their 
contribution  is  not  pennanent,  but  as- 
sessed by  the  lord  with  the  advice  of 
prud'  hoinmes,  resseants  sur  les  lieux, 
according  to  the  peasant's  ability.  Oth- 
ers pay  a  fixed  sum.  Some  are  called 
serfs  de  poursuite,  who  cannot  leave 
their  habitations,  but  maj-  be  followed 
by  the  lord  into  any  part  of  France  for 
the  taille  upon  their  good3.  This  was 
the  case  in  part  of  Champagne  and  the 
Nivernois.  Nor  could  these  serfs,  or 
gens  de  mainmorte,  as  they  were  some- 
times called,  be  manumitted  without  let- 
ters patent  of  the  king,  purchased  by  a 
fine.  — Recherches  delaFrance,  1.  iv.  c.  •">. 
Dubos  informs  us  that,  in  1615,  the  Tiers 
Etat  prayed  the  king  to  cause  all  serfs 
{hommes  de  pooste)  to  be  enfranchised 
on  paving  a  composition  \  V;  *  this  was 


not  complied  with,  and  they  existed  in 
many  parts  when  he  wrote. — Histoire, 
Critique,  t.  iii.  p.  298.  Argou,  in  his 
Institutions  du  Droit  Francois,  confirms 
this,  and  refers  to  the  customaries  of  Ni- 
vernois and  Vitry,  1.  i.  c.  1.  And  M.  de 
Brequigny,  in  his  preface  to  the  twelfth 
volume  of  the  collection  of  Ordonnances, 
p.  22.  says  that  throughout  almost  the 
whole  jurisdiction  of  the  parliament  of 
Ben-aucon  the  peasants  were  attached 
to  the  soil,  not  being  capable  of  leaving 
it  without  the  lord's  consent ;  and  that 
iu  some  places  he  even  inherited  their 
goods  in  exclusion  of  the  kindred.  I 
recollect  to  have  read  in  some  part  of 
Voltaire's  correspondence  an  anecdote 
of  his  interference,  with  that  zeal  against 
oppression  which  is  the  shining  side  of 
his  moral  character,  iu  behalf  of  some 
of  these  wretched  slaves  of  Franche- 
comte. 

About  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, some  Catalonian  serfs  who  had  es- 
caped into  France  being  claimed  by  their 
lords,  the  parliament  of  Toulouse  de- 
clared  that  every  man  who  entered  the 
kingdom  en  criant  France  should  be- 
come free.  The  liberty  of  our  kingdom 
is  such.  Bays  Mezeray,  that  its  air  com- 
municates f red  loin  to  those  who  breathe 
it,  and  our  kings  are  too  august  to  reign 
over  any  but  freemen.  Villaret,  t.  xv. 
p.  348.  How  much  pretence  Mezeray 
had  lor  such  a  flourish  may  be  decided 
by  the  former  part  of  this  note. 


202        STATE  OF   FRANCE  AND   GERMANY.    Chap.  II.  Pakt  II. 

lands  never  changed  their  character  along  with  that  of  the 
possessor;  so  that  a  nobleman  might,  and  often  did,  hold 
estates  in  roture,  as  well  as  a  roturier  acquire  a  lief.  Thus 
in  England  the  terre  tenants  in  villenage,  who  occur  in  our 
old  books,  were  not  villeins,  but  freemen  holding  lands  which 
had  been  from  time  immemorial  of  a  villein  quality. 

At  the  final  separation  of  the  French  from  the  German 
side  of  Charlemagne's  empire  by  the  treaty  of  Verdun  in 
843,  there  was  perhaps  hardly  any  difference  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  two  kingdoms.  If  any  might  be  con- 
ttYestateof  jectured  to  have  existed,  it  would  be  a  greater 
France  and     independence  and  fuller  rights  of  election  in  the 

Germany.  .  .,.  ,  ,  n     y~°  ., 

nobility  and  people  of  Germany.  lint  in  the 
lapse  of  another  century  France  had  lost  all  her  political 
unity,  and  her  kings  all  their  authority ;  while  the  Germanic 
empire  was  entirely  unbroken  under  an  effectual,  though  not 
absolute,  control  of  its  sovereign.  No  comparison  can  be 
made  between  the  power  of  Charles  the  Simple  and  Conrad 
the  First,  though  the  former  had  the  shadow  of  an  hereditary 
right,  and  the  latter  was  chosen  from  among  his  equals.  A 
long  succession  of  feeble  princes  or  usurpers,  and  destructive 
incursions  of  the  Normans,  reduced  France  almost  to  a  disso- 
lution of  society ;  while  Germany,  under  Conrad,  Henry,  and 
the  Othos,  found  their  arms  not  less  prompt  and  successful 
against  revolted  vassals  than  external  enemies.  The  high 
dignities  were  less  completely  hereditary  than  they  had 
become  in  France ;  they  were  granted,  indeed,  pretty  regu- 
larly, but  they  were  solicited  as  well  as  granted ;  while  the 
chief  vassals  of  the  French  crown  assumed  them  as  patrimo- 
nial sovereignties,  to  which  a  royal  investiture  gave  more  of 
ornament  than  sanction 

In  the  eleventh  century  these  imperial  prerogatives  began 
to  lose  part  of  their  lustre.  The  long  struggles  of  the  princes 
and  clergy  against  Henry  IV.  and  his  son.  the  revival  of 
more  effective  rights  of  election  on  the  extinction  of  the  house 
of  Franconia,  the  exhausting  contests  of  the  Swabian  emper- 
ors in  Italy,  the  intrinsic  weakness  produced  by  a  law  of  the 
empire,  according  to  which  the  reigning  sovereign  could  not 
retain  an  imperial  lief  more  than  a  year  in  his  bands,  gradu- 
ally prepared  that  independence  of  the  German  aristocracy 
which  reached  its  height  about  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth 
century.     During  this  period   the    French   crown    had   been 


feudal  System.  COINING  MONEY.  203 

insensibly  gaining  strength ;  and  as  one  monarch  degenerated 
into  the  mere  head  of  a  confederacy,  the  other  acquired  un- 
limited power  over  a  solid  kingdom. 

It  would  be  tedious,  and  not  very  instructive,  to  follow  the 
details  of  German  public  law  during  the  middle  ages;  nor 
are  the  more  important  parts  of  it  easily  separable  from  civil 
history.  In  this  relation  they  will  find  a  place  in  a  subse- 
quent chapter  of  the  present  work.  France  demands  a  more 
minute  attention ;  and  in  tracing  the  character  of  the  feudal 
system  in  that  country,  we  shall  find  ourselves  developing  the 
progress  of  a  very  different  polity. 

To  understand  in  what  degree  the  peers  and  barons  of 
France,  during  the  prevalence  of  feudal  principles, 
were  independent  of  the  crown,  we  must  look  at  oAh?^8 
their  leading  privileges.     These  may  be  reckoned :  French 
1.  The  right  of  coining  money ;  2.  That  of  waging  V< 
private  war  ;  3.  The  exemption  from  all  public  tributes,  except 
the  feudal   aids;    4.   The  freedom   from   legislative   control; 
and,  5.  The  exclusive  exercise  of  original  judicature  in  their 
dominions.     Privileges  so  enormous,  and  so  contrary  to  all 
principles  of  sovereignty,  might  lead  us,  in  strictness,  to  ac- 
count France  rather  a  collection  of  states,  partially  allied  to 
each  other,  than  a  single  monarchy. 

1.  Silver  and  gold  were  not  very  scarce  in  the  first  ages 
of  the  French  monarchy ;    but  they  passed  more  Coining 
by  weight  than  by  tale.     A  lax  and  ignorant  gov-  money- 
ernment,  which  had  not  learned  the  lucrative  mysteries  of  a 
royal  mint,  was  not  particularly  solicitous  to  give  its  subjects 
the  security  of  a  known  stamp  in  their  exchanges.1     In  some 
cities  of  France  money  appears  to  have  been  coined  by  pri 
vate  authority  before  the  time  of  Charlemagne ;  at  least  one 
of  his  capitularies  forbids  the  circulation  of  any  that  had  not 
been  stamped  in  the  royal  mint.     His  successors  indulge1 
some  of  their  vassals  with  the  privilege  of  coining  money  fo 
the  use  of  their  own  territories,  but  not  without  the  roya. 
stamp.     About  the  beginning  of  the  tenth  century,  however, 

*  The  practice  of  keeping  fine  gold  and  tie  money  was  coined  in  France,  and  that 

silver  uncoined  prevailed  among  private  only  for   small   payments.  —  Traite   des 

persons,  as  well  as  in  the  treasury,  down  Monnoyes.     It  is  curious   that,  though 

to  the  time  of  Philip  the  Pair.     Nothing  there  are  many  gold  coins  extant  of  the 

is  more  common  than  to  find,  in  the  in-  first  race  of  kings,  yet  few  or  none  are 

struments  of  earlier  time,  payments  or  preserved  of  the  second  or  third  before 

fines  stipulated  by  weight  of  gold  or  sil-  the  reign  of  Philip  the  Fair  —  T)u  Cange 

ver.     Le  Blanc  therefore  thinks  that  lit-  y   Moneta 


204  COINING  MONEY.  Chap.  II.  Pakt  li 

the  lords,  among  their  other  assumptions  of  independence, 
issued  money  with  no  marks  but  their  own.1  At  the  accession 
of  Hugh  Capet  as  many  as  a  hundred  and  fifty  are  said  to 
have  exercised  this  power.  Even  under  St.  Louis  it  was 
sssed  by  about  eighty,  who,  excluding  as  far  as  possible 
the  royal  coin  from  circulation,  enriched  themselves  at  their 
subjects1  expense  by  high  duties  (seigniorages),  which  they 
imposed  upon  every  new  coinage,  as  well  a-  by  debasing  its 
standard.2  In  1185  Philip  Augustus  requests  the  abbot  of 
Corvey,  who  had  desisted  from  using  his  own  mint,  to  let  the 
royal  money  of  Paris  circulate  through  his  territories,  prom- 
ising that,  when  it  should  please  the  abbot  to  coin  money 
afresh  for  himself,  the  king  would  not  oppose  its  circulation.8 

Several  regulations  were  made  by  Louis  IX.  to  limit,  as 
far  as  lay  in  his  power,  the  exercise  of  this  baronial  privilege, 
and,  in  particular,  by  enacting  that  the  royal  money  should 
circulate  in  the  domains  of  those  barons  who  had  mints,  con 
currently  with  their  own,  and  exclusive!}'  within  the  territories 
of  those  who  did  not  enjoy  that  right.  Philip  the  Fair 
established  royal  officers  of  inspection  in  every  private  mint. 
It  was  asserted  in  his  reign,  as  a  general  truth,  that  no  subject 
might  coin  silver  money.4  In  fact,  the  adulteration  practised 
in  those  baronial  mints  had  reduced  their  pretended  silver  to 
a  sort  of  black  metal,  as  it  was  called  (moneta  nigra),  into 
which  little  entered  but  copper.  Silver,  however,  and  even 
gold,  were  coined  by  the  dukes  of  Britany  so  long  as  that 
fief  continued  to  exist.  No  subjects  ever  enjoyed  the  right 
of  coining  silver  in  England  without  the  royal  stamp  and 
superintendence5  —  a  remarkable  proof  of  the  restraint  in 
which  the  feudal  aristocracy  was  always  held  in  this  country. 

2.  The  passion  of  revenge,  always  among  the  most  ungov- 

i  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii.  profit  especial,  mais  en  profit  et  en  la 

p.  110;  Kec.  des  Historieas,  t.  xi.  pref.  defence  du  commun.     This  was  in  a  pro- 

p.  180  ;  Du  Cange,  v.  Moneta.  cess  commenced  by  the  king's  procureur- 

2  Le  Blauc.  Traits  des  Monnoyes,  p.  91.  genera]  against  the  comte  de  Nevers,  tor 

3  Du  Cange,  voc.  Moneta  ;  Velly,  Hist,  defacing  his  coin.  —  Le  Blanc,  Traite  des 
de  France,  t.  ii.  p.  93:  Villaret,  t.  xiv.  Monnoyes,  p.  92.  In  many  places  the 
P- 200.  lord  took  a  sum  from  his  tenants  every 

*  Du  Cange,  v.  Moneta.    The  right  of  three  years,  under  the  name  of  mono- 

debasing  the  coin  was  also  claimed  by  tagiuni  or  fbcagium,  in  lieu  of  debasing 

this    prince  as  a  choice  flower  of   his  his  money.     This  was  finally   abolished 

crown.    Item,  abaisser  et  amenuser  la  in  1830  —  Du  Gauge,  v.  Monetagium. 

monnoye  est  privilege  especial  au  roy  de  '■  I  do  not  extend  this  to  the  fart  ,•  for 

son  droit  royal,  si  que  a  luy  appartient,  in  the  anarchy  of  Stephen's  reign  both 

et  a  non  autre,  et  encore  en  unseal  cas,  bishops  and  barons  coined  money  fo? 

e'est  a  scavoir  en  necessite,  et  lors  ne  themselves  -  Uoveden,  p.  490. 
rient  pas  le  ganeg,  ne  convertit  en  son 


Feudal  System.      RIGHT   OF   PRIVATE   WAR  205 

ernable  in  human  nature,  acts  with  such  violence  Rio.ht  of 
upon  barbarian-,  that  it  is  utterly  beyond  the  con-  private 
trol  of  their  imperfect  arrangements  of  polity.  It  war" 
seems  to  them  no  part  of  the  social  compact  to  sacrifice  the 
privilege  which  nature  has  placed  in  the  arm  of  valor. 
Gradually,  however,  these  fiercer  feelings  are  blunted,  an  1 
another  passion,  hardly  less  powerful  than  resentment,  is 
brought  to  play  in  a  contrary  direction.  The  earlier  object 
accordingly  of  jurisprudence  is  to  establish  a  fixed  atonement 
for  injuries,  as  much  for  the  preservation  of  tranquillity  as  the 
prevention  of  crime.  Such  were  the  weregilds  of  the  bar- 
baric codes,  which,  for  a  different  purpose,  I  .have  already 
mentioned.1  But  whether  it  were  that  the  kindred  did  not 
always  accept,  or  the  criminal  offer,  the  legal  composition,  or 
that  other  causes  of  quarrel  occurred,  private  feuds  (faida) 
were  perpetually  breaking  out,  and  many  of  Charlemagne's 
capitularies  are  directed  against  them.  After  his  time  all 
hope  of  restraining  so  inveterate  a  practice  was  at  an  end  ;  and 
every  man  who  owned  a  castle  to  shelter  him  in  case  of 
defeat,  and  a  sufficient  number  of  dependents  to  take  the  field, 
was  at  liberty  to  retaliate  upon  his  neighbors  whenever  he 
thought  himself  injured.  It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  there 
was,  frequently,  either  no  jurisdiction  to  which  he  could 
appeal,  or  no  power  to  enforce  its  awards ;  so  that  we  may 
consider  the  higher  nobility  of  France  as  in  a  state  of  nature 
with  respect  to  each  other,  and  entitled  to  avail  themselves 
of  all  legitimate  grounds  of  hostility.  The  right  of  waging 
private  war  was  moderated  by  Louis  IX.,  checked  by  Philip 
IV.,  suppressed  by  Charles  VI. ;  but  a  few  vestiges  of  its 
practice  may  be  found  still  later.2 

3.  In  the  modern  condition  of  governments,  taxation  is  a 

i  The  antiquity   of   compositions   for  penetrating  eye  of  that  historian;   and 

murder  is  illustrated  by  Iliad   £,  498,  they  are  arranged  so  well  as  to  form  n 

where,  in  the  description  of  the  shield  of  comprehensive  treatise  in  small  compass. 

Achilles,  two  disputants  are  represented  I  know  not  that  I  could  add  any  much 

wrangling  before  the  judge  for  the  were-  worthy  of  notice,    unless  it  be  the  fob 

gild  or   price  of  blood;  elvEKO,    TTOLV^g  lowing: — In   the  treaty  between  I'hilip 

avdpbg  (nrocpduievov.  Augustus   and   Richard   Coeur    de   Lion 

2  The    subject  of   private   warfare   is  (1194>:  the  *atter  ™*UBf*  *°  admi*  *he 

treated  so  exactly  and  perspicuously  by  insertion  of  an  article  that  none  of   he 

Robertson,  that  1  should  only  waste  the  h*™8  ,  f  f^8*  £"&  *'T       m?  est  thfl 

reader's  time  by  dwelling  so  long  upon  it  other;  lest  he  should  infringe  the  cus- 

as  its  extent  and  importance  would  other-  *oms  .f  Poitou  a?d  h,s  ff  "j1'  dominions 

wise  demand.  -  See  Hist,  of  Charles  V.  In  I™0"8  °onsuetum  erat  ah  antique  ut 

vol.  i.  note  21.    Few  leading  passages  in  magnates  causas  propnas  inyicem gladns 

the  monuments  of  the  middle  ages  rela-  aUegarent. - Hoyeden,  p.  .41  (in  Saville 

tiye    to  this  subject  have  escaped   the  »cnpt.  AngUc.) 


206  REVENUES  OF  FRANCE.     Chap.  IF  Part  11 

immuuit      cliief   engine  of   the     well -compacted    machinery 
from  which    regulates   the  system.     The   payments,  the 

uercuues  prohibitions,  the  licenses,  the  watchfulness  of  col- 
of  kings  of  lection,  the  evasions  of  fraud,  the  penalties  and  for- 
feitures, that  attend  a  fiscal  code  of  laws,  present 
continually  to  the  mind  of  the  most  remote  and  humble  indi- 
vidual the  notion  of  a  supreme,  vigilant,  and  coercive  au- 
thority. But  the  early  European  kingdoms  knew  neither  the 
necessities  nor  the  ingenuity  of  modern  finance.  From  their 
demesne  lands  the  kings  of  France  and  Lombardy  supplied 
the  common  expenses  of  a  barbarous  court.  Even  Charle- 
magne regulated  the  economy  of  his  farms  with  the  minute- 
ness of  a  steward,  and  a  large  portion  of  his  capitularies  are 
directed  to  this  object.  Their  actual  revenue  was  chiefly 
derived  from  free  gifts,  made,  according  to  an  ancient  German 
custom,  at  the  annual  assemblies1  of  the  nation,  from  amerce- 
ments paid  by  alodial  proprietors  for  default  of  military  ser- 
vice, and  from  the  freda,  or  fines,  accruing  to  the  judge  out 
of  compositions  for  murder.2  These  amounted  to  one  third 
of  the  whole  weregild ;  one  third  of  this  was  paid  over  by 
the  count  to  the  royal  exchequer.  After  the  feudal  govern 
ment  prevailed  in  France,  and  neither  the  heribannum  nor 
the  weregild  continued  in  use,  there  seems  to  have  been 
hardly  any  source  of  regular  revenue  besides  the  domanial 
estates  of  the  crown ;  unless  we  may  reckon  as  such,  that 
during  a  journey  the  king  had  a  prescriptive  right  to  be 
supplied  with  necessaries  by  the  towns  and  abbeys  through 
which  he  passed ;  commuted  sometimes  into  petty  regular 
payments,  called  droits  de  gist  et  de  chevauche.3  Hugh 
Capet  was  nearly  indigent  as  king  of  France,  though,  as 
count  of  Paris  and  Orleans,  he  might  take  the  feudal  aids  and 
reliefs  of  his  vassals.  Several  other  small  emoluments  of 
himself  and  his  successors,  whatever  they  may  since  have 
been  considered,  were  in  that  age  rather  seigniorial  than  royal. 
The  rights  of  toll,  of  customs,  of  alienage  (aubaine),  gener- 
ally even  the  regale  or  enjoyment  of  the  temporalities  of 
vacant  episcopal  sees  and  other  ecclesiastical  benefices,4  were 

1  Du  Cange,  Dissertation  quatrieme  sur  twelfth  century.     But  far  the  most  lu 

Joinville.  minous   view  of   that    subject,   for   the 

'-  Afably,  1.  i.  c.  2.  note  3 ;  Du  Cange  three  next  ages,  is  displayed  by  M.  d« 

roc.  Heribannum,  Fredum.  Pasfcoret  in  his  prefaces  tn  the  fifteenth 

•Velly.  t.  ii.  p.   329;  Villaret,  t.    xiv.  and   sixteenth    volumes    of    the    Ordon- 

p.  174-195 ;  Reeueil  des  EDstoriens,  t.  xiv.  nances  des  Itois. 

preface,  p.  37.    The  last  i<  a  perspicuous  4  The  duke  of  Burgundy  ard  count  of 

account  of    the   royai    revenue   iu    the  Champagne  did  not  possess  the  regale 


Fkudal  System.    EXACTIONS  FROM  THE  JEWS.  207 

possessed  within  their  own  domains  by  the  great  feudataries  of 
the  crown.  They,  I  apprehend,  contributed  nothing  to  their 
sovereign,  not  even  those  aids  which  the  feudal  customs  en- 
joined.1 

The  history  of  the  royal  revenue  in  France  is,  however, 
too  important  to  be  slightly  passed  over.     As  the  Exacti0ng 
necessities  of  government  increased,  partly  through  from  tne 

•  Jews 

the  love  of  magnificence  and  pageantry  introduced  by 
the  crusades  and  the  temper  of  chivalry,  partly  in  consequence 
of  employing  hired  troops  instead  of  the  feudal  militia,  it 
became  impossible  to  defray  its  expenses  by  the  ordinary 
means.  Several  devices,  therefore,  were  tried,  in  order  to 
replenish  the  exchequer.  One  of  these  was  by  extorting 
money  from  the  Jews.  It  is  almost  incredible  to  what  a 
length  this  was  carried.  Usury,  forbidden  by  law  and  su- 
perstition to  Christians,  was  confined  to  this  industrious  and 
covetous  people.2  It  is  now  no  secret  that  all  regulation? 
interfering  with  the  interest  of  money  render  its  terms  more 
rigorous  and  burdensome.  The  children  of  Israel  grew  rich 
in  despite  of  insult  and  oppression,  and  retaliated  upon  their 
Christian  debtors.  If  an  historian  of  Philip  Augustus  may 
be  believed,  they  possessed  almost  one  half  of  Paris.  Un- 
questionably they  must  have  had  support  both  at  the  court  and 
»n  the  halls  of  justice.  The  policy  of  the  kings  of  France  was 
to  employ  them  as  a  sponge  to  suck  their  subjects'  money, 
which  they  might  afterwards  express  with  less  odium  than 
direct  taxation  would  incur.  Philip  Augustus  released  all 
Christians  in  his  dominions  from  their  debts  to  the  Jews, 
reserving  a  fifth  part  to  himself.3  He  afterwards  expelled  the 
whole  nation  from  France.  But  they  appear  to  have  returned 
again  —  whether  by  stealth,  or,  as  is  more  probable,  by  pur- 
chasing permission.  St.  Louis  twice  banished  and  twice  recall- 
ed the  Jews.  A  series  of  alternate  persecution  and  tolerance 
was  borne  by  this  extraordinary  people  with  an  invincible 
perseverance,  and  a  talent  of  accumulating  riches  which  kept 

But  it  was  enjoyed  by  all    the    other  tiou  paid  by  the  vassals  of  the  French 

peers  ;   by  tbe  dukes  of  Normandy,  Gui-  crown;  but  in  this  negative  proposition 

enne,  and  Britany;   the  counts  of  Tou-  it  is  possible  that  I  may  be  deceived, 

louse,    Poitou,    and    Flanders. — Mably,  2  The  Jews  were  celebrated  for  usun 

1.  iii.  c.  4;  llecueil  des  Historiens,  t.  ii.  as*  early  as    the  sixth   century.  —  Greg 

p.  229,  and  t.  xiv.  p.  53;  Ordonnances  Turon.  1.  iv.  c.  12,  and  1.  vii.  c.  23. 

des  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  621.  3  Rigord,  in   Du  Chepne.  Hist.  Fran* 

!I  have  never  met  with  any  instance  Script,  t.  iii.  p.  8. 
of  a  relief,  aid,  or  other  feudal  contribu- 


208  DEBASEMENT   OF  THE  COIN     Chap.  II.  Part  II. 

pace  with  their  plunderers  ;  till  new  schemes  of  finance  sup- 
plying the  turn,  they  were  finally  expelled  under  Charles  Yl.. 
and  never  afterwards  obtained  any  legal  establishment  in 
France.1 

A  much  more  extensive  plan  of  rapine  was  carried  on  by 
lowering  the  standard  of  coin.  Originally  the 
ueiitof  pound,  a  money  of  account,  was  equivalent  to 
the  com.  twelve  ounces  of  silver ; 2  and  divided  into  twenty 
pieces  cf  coin  (sons),  each  equal  consequently  to  nearly  three 
shillings  and  four  pence  of  our  new  English  money.3  At  the 
revolution  the  money  of  France  had  been  depreciated  in  the 
proportion  of  seventy-three  to  one,  and  the  sol  was  about 
equal  to  an  English  halfpenny.  This  was  the  effect  of  a 
long  continuance  of  fraudulent  and  arbitrary  government. 
The  abuse  began  under  Philip  I.  in  1103,  who  alloyed  his 
silver  coin  with  a  third  of  copper.  So  good  an  example  was 
not  lost  upon  subsequent  princes  ;  till,  under  St.  Louis,  llie> 
mark-weight  of  silver,  or  eight  ounces,  was  equivalent  to 
fifty  sous  of  the  debased  coin.  Nevertheless  these  changes 
seem  hitherto  to  have  produced  no  discontent ;  whether  it 
were  that  a  people  neither  commercial  nor  enlightened  did 
not  readily  perceive  their  tendency ;  or,  as  has  been  ingeni- 
ously conjectured,  that  these  successive  diminutions  of  the 
standard  were  nearly  counterbalanced  by  an  augmentation  in 
the  value  of  silver,  occasioned  by  the  drain  of  money  during 
the  crusades,  with  which  they  were  about  contemporaneous.4 
But  the  rapacity  of  Philip  the  Fair  kept  no  measures  with 
the  public;  and  the  mark  in  his  reign  had  become  equal 
to  eight  livres,  or  a  hundred  and  sixty  sous  of  money.     Dis- 

i  Villaret,   t.   ix.   p.  433.      Metz  con-  seems  not  to  have  been  much  observed 

tained,  and  I  suppose  still  contains,  a  by   those    who    had    previously  written 

great  many  Jews  ;  but  Metz  was  not  part  upon  the  subject. 

of  the  ancient  kingdom.  3  Besides  this  silver  coin  there  was  a 

2  In    every  edition   of  this   work,   till  golden  sol,  wortli  forty  pence.     be  Blanc 

that  of  1846,  a  strange  misprint  has  ap-  thinks   the   solidi   of  the   Salic   law  and 

pearedof  twenty  instead  of  twelve  ounces,  capitularies               the  latter    piece    of 

as   the   division  of  the  pound  of  silver,  money.     The   denarius,    or   penny,    was 

Most  readers  will  correct  this  for  them-  worth   two  sons  sis  deniers  of  modern 

selves  ;  but  it  is  more  material  to  observe  French   coin. 

that,  according  to  what  we  rind  in  the  4  Villaret,  t.  xiv.  p.  193.     The  price  of 

Mi-moires    de    1'Acad.    des    Inscriptions  commodities,  he  asserts,  did  not  rise  till 

(Xouvelle   Serie),   vol.   xiv.   p.   234,   the  the  time  of  St.  Louis.     If  this  be  said  on 

pound  in  the  time  of  Charlemagne  was  good  authority  it   is  a  remarkable  fact  ; 

not  of  12  ounces,  but  of  13!;.     We  must,  but   in    England  we   know  very  little  of 

therefore,  add  one  ninth  to  the  value  of  prices  before  thai   period,  and  I  doubt  if 

the  sol,  so  long  as  this  continued  to  be  their    history  has  been   better  traced  in 

the  casp.    I  do  not  know  the  proofs  upon  France, 
which  this  assertion  rests;  but  the  fact 


Feudal  System.  DIRECT  TAXATION.  209 

satisfaction,  and  even  tumults,  arose  in  consequence,  and  lie 
was  compelled  to  restore  the  coin  to  its  standard  under  St. 
Louis.1  His  successors  practised  the  same  arts  of  enriching 
their  treasury ;  under  Philip  of  Valois  the  mark  was  again 
worth  eight  livres.  But  the  film  had  now  dropped  from  the 
eyes  of  the  people  ;  and  these  adulterations  of  money,  ren- 
dered more  vexatious  by  continued  recoinages  of  the  current 
pieces,  upon  which  a  fee  was  extorted  by  the  moneyers, 
showed  in  their  true  light  as  mingled  fraud  and  robbery.2 

These  resources  of  government,  however,  by  no  means  su- 
perseded the  necessity  of  more  direct  taxation.  Direct 
The  kings  of  France  exacted  money  from  the  ro-  taxation- 
turiers,  and  particularly  the  inhabitants  of  towns,  within  their 
domains.  In  this  they  only  acted  as  proprietors,  or  suze- 
rains ;  and  the  barons  took  the  same  course  in  their  own 
lands.  Philip  Augustus  first  ventured  upon  a  stretch  of  pre- 
rogative, which,  in  the  words  of  his  biographer,  disturbed  all 
France.  He  deprived  by  force,  says  Rigord,  both  his  own 
vassals,  who  had  been  accustomed  to  boast  of  their  immuni- 
ties, and  their  feudal  tenants,  of  a  third  part  of  their  goods.8 
Such  arbitrary  taxation  of  the  nobility,  who  deemed  that  their 
military  service  discharged  them  from  all  pecuniary  burdens, 
France  was  far  too  aristocratical  a  country  to  bear.  It  seems 
not  to  have  been  repeated ;  and  his  successors  generally  pur- 
sued more  legitimate  courses.  Upon  obtaining  any  contribu- 
tion, it  was  usual  to  grant  letters-patent,  declaring  that  it  had 
been  freely  given,  and  should  not  be  turned  into  precedent  in 
time  to  come.  Several  of  these  letters-patent  of  Philip  the 
Fair  are  extant,  and  published  in  the  general  collection  of 

i  It  is  curious,  and  not  perhaps  unim-  telle  monnoye   conime    l'on    aura    em- 

portant,  to   learn  the  course  pursued  in  prunte,  si  elle  a  plein  cours  au  temps 

adjusting  payments   upon   the   restora-  du  payement,  et  sinon,  ills  payeront  en 

tion  of  good  coin,  which  happened  pret-  monnoye  coursable,  lors  selou  la  valeur 

ty  frequently  in  the  fourteenth  century,  et  le  prix  du  marc  d'or  on  d'argent :  p. 

when    the    States-General,    or    popular  32. 

clamor,  forced   the  court   to  retract  its        2  Continuator  Gui.  de  Nangis  in  Spici- 

fraudulent  policy,     he   Blanc  has  pub-  legio,  t.  iii.     For  the  successive  changes 

lished  several   ordinances   nearly  to  the  in  the  value  of  French  coins  the  reader 

same  effect.     One  of  Charles  VI.  explains  may  consult  Le  Blanc's  treatise,  or  the 

the  method  adopted  rather  more  fully  Ordonnances  des   Kois ;  also  a  disserta- 

than  the  rest.     All  debts  incurred  since  tion  by  Bonamy  in  the  Mem.  de  1' Acad. 

the  depreciated  coin  began  to  circulate  des  Inscriptions,  t.  xxxii ;  or  he  may  find 

were  to  be  paid  ii>  that  coin,  or  according  a  summary  view  of  them  in  Du  Cange,  v. 

to  its  value.     Those  incurred  previously  Moneta.     The  bad  conse  |uences  of  these 

to  its  commencement  were  to  be  paid  a.c-  innovations   are   well   treated   by  M.   de 

cording   to  the  value  of  the   money  cir-  Pastoret,  in  his  elaborate  preface  to  the 

dilating  at   the   time   of  the  contract,  sixteenth    volume   of   the    Oricnnancc* 

item,  que  tous  les  vrais  emprunts  faits  des  Itois,  p.  40 
en  deniers   sann  fraude  se  payeront  en        s  Du  Chesne,  t.  v.  p.  43. 

vol,  I—  m,  14 


210  NO   SUPREME   LEGISLATION.    Chap.  II.  Part  II 

Ordinances.1     But  in  the  reign  of  this  monarch  a  great  inno- 
vation took  place  in  the  French  constitution,  which,  though  it 
principally  affected  the  method  of  levying  money,  may  seem 
to  fell  more  naturally  under  the  next  head  oi'  consideration. 
4.  There  is   no   part  of  the  French   feudal  policy  so  re- 
markable  as   the   entire   absence  of  all  supreme 
Jupmue         Legislation.     We  find  it  difficult   to   conceive   the 
legislative       existence    of   a   political    society,    nominally    one 
kingdom  and  under  one  head,  in  which,  for  more 
than  three  hundred  years,  there  was  wanting  the  most  essen- 
tial attribute  of  government.     It  will  be  requisite,  however, 
to   take   this  up   a   little  higher,  and  inquire  what   was   the 
original  legislature  of  the  French  monarchy. 

Arbitrary  rule,  at  least  in  theory,  was  uncongenial  to  the 

character  of  the   northern  nations.     Neither   the 

tegSStive       power  of  making  laws,  nor  that  of  applying  them 

assemblies      to  the  circumstances  of  particular  cases,  was  left  at 

of  T^vatipg 

the  discretion  of  the  sovereign.  The  Lombard 
kings  held  assemblies  every  year  at  Pavia,  where  the  chief 
officers  of  the  crown  and  proprietors  of  lands  deliberated 
upon  all  legislative  measures,  in  the  presence,  and  nominally 
at  least  with  the  consent,  of  the  multitude.2  Frequent  men- 
tion is  made  of  similar  public  meetings  in  France  by  the  his- 
torians of  the  Merovingian  kings,  and  still  more  unequivocally 
by  their  statutes.3  These  assemblies  have  been  called  parlia- 
ments of  the  Champ  de  Mars,  having  orginally  been  held  in 
the  month  of  March.  But  they  are  supposed  by  many  to 
have  gone  much  into  disuse  under  the  later  Merovingian 
kings.  That  of  615,  the  most  important  of  which  any  trace? 
remain,  was  at  the  close  of  the  great  revolution  which  pun 

i  Fasons  scavoir  et  recognoissons  que  omni  populo  assistente. —  Muratori,  Ids 

la  derniere  subvention  que  ils  nous  ont  sert.  22. 

faite  (les  barons,  vassaux, et  nobles  d'Au-        8Mably,  1.  i.  c.  i.  note  1;  Lindebrog 

vergne)  de  pure  grace  sans  ce  que  ils  y  Codex  Legum  Autiquarum,  p.  363,  369. 

fassent  tenus  quede  grace  :  et  voulons  et  Tbe  following  passage,  quoted  by  Mably 

leur  octroyones  que  les  autres  subven-  (c.  ii.  n.  6),  from  the  preamble  of  thifl 

tions  que  ils  nous  ont  faites  ne  leur  faeent  revised  Salic  law  under  Clotaire  II.,  i- 

nul  prejudice,  es  choses  esquelles  ils  n'e-  explicit :  Temporibufl  Clotairii  regis  una 

toient  tenus,  ne  par  ce  nul  nouveau  droit  cum  prineipibus  fcnis,  id  est  33  erissopia 

ne  nous  soit  acquis  ne  amenuisie.  —  Or-  et  34  ducibus  et  79  comitibus,  vel  caetero 

donnance  de  1304,  amid  Blably.  I.  iv.  c.  populo  constitute  est.     A  remarkable  in 

3,  note  5.     See  other  authorities  in  tbe  stance  of  the  use  of   Del  instead  of  rt. 

same  place.  which  was  not  uncommon,  and  is  noticed 

-  Liutprand,   king   of   the    Lombards,  by  Du  Cange,  under  the  word  Vel.     An- 

says  that  his  laws  sibi  placuisse  una  rum  other  proof  of  it  occurs  in  the  very  next 

omnibus  judicious  de  Austria?  et  Neus-  quotation  of  Mably  from   the   edict  of 

triae  partibus,  et  le  Tuscise  flnibus,  cum  615  :  cum  pontificibus,  vel  cum  magnif 

reliquis  ndelibus  meis  Langobardis,  et  viris  optiinatibus. 


Feudal  System  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  211 

ished  Brunehaut  for  aspiring  to  despotic  power.  Whether 
these  assemblies  were  composed  of  any  except  prelates,  great 
landholders,  or  what  we  may  call  nobles,  and  the  An  trust-ions 
of  the  king,  is  still  an  unsettled  point.  Some  have  even  sup- 
posed, since  bishops  are  only  mentioned  by  name  in  the  great 
statute  of  Clotaire  II.  in  615,  that  they  were  then  present  for 
the  first  time ;  and  Sismondi,  forgetting  this  fact,  has  gone 
so  far  as  to  think  that  Pepin  first  admitted  the  prelates  to 
national  councils.1  But  the  constitutions  of  the  Merovingian 
kings  frequently  bear  upon  ecclesiastical  regulations,  and  must 
have  been  prompted  at  least  by  the  advice  of  the  bishops. 
Their  influence  was  immense;  and  though  the  Romans 
generally  are  not  supposed  to  have  been  admitted  by  right 
of  territorial  property  to  the  national  assemblies,  there  can  be 
no  improbability  in  presuming  that  the  chiefs  or'  the  church, 
especially  when  some  of  them  were  barbarians,  stood  in  a 
different  position.  We  know  this  was  so  at  least,  in  615,  and 
nothing  leads  to  a  conclusion  that  it  was  for  the  first  time. 

It  is  far  more  difficult  to  determine  the  participation  of  the 
Frank  people,  the  alodialists  or  Rachimburgii,  in  these  as- 
semblies of  the  Field  of  March.  They  could  not,  it  is  said, 
easily  have  repaired  thither  from  all  parts  of  France.  But 
while  the  monarchy  was  divided,  and  all  the  left  bank  of  the 
Loire,  in  consequence  of  the  paucity  of  Franks  settled  there, 
was  hardly  connected  politically  with  any  section  of  it,  there 
does  not  seem  an  improbability  that  the  subjects  of  a  king  of 
Paris  or  Soissons  might  have  been  numerously  present  in 
those  capitals.  It  is  generally  allowed  that  they  attended 
with  annual  gifts  to  their  sovereign;  though  perhaps  these 
were  chiefly  brought  by  the  beneficiary  tenants  and  wealthy 
alodialists.  We  certainly  find  expressions,  some  of  which  I 
have  quoted,  indicating  a  popular  assent  to  the  resolutions 
taken,  or  laws  enacted,  in  the  Field  of  March.  Perhaps  the 
most  probable  hypothesis  may  be  that  the  presence  of  the 
nation  was  traditionally  required  in  conformity  to  the  ancient 

i  Voltaire  (Essai    sur   PHistoire  Uui-  the  early  French  history,   and  amused 

verselle)  ascribes  this  to  the  elder  Pepin,  himself  by  questioning  the  most  public 

gurnamed  Huristal,  and  quotes  the  An-  as  well  as  probable  facts,  such  as  the 

nals  of  Metz  for  692;  but  neither  under  death  of  Brunehaut.     The   compliment 

that  year  nor  any  other  do  I  find  a  word  which  Robertson  has  paid  So  Voltaire's 

to  the  purpose.     Yet  he  pompously  an-  historical   kuowledge  is  much  exagger- 

nounces  this  as  "  an  epoch  not  regarded  ated  relatively  to  the  mediaeval  period; 

by  historians,  but  that  of  the  temporal  the  latter  history  of  his  country  he  po» 

-»ower  of  the  church  in  France  and  Ger-  sessed  very  well, 
many."    Voltaire  knew  but  superficially 


212  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.      Chap.  II.  Pari  II 

German  usage,  which  had  not  been  formally  abolished ; 
while  the  difficulty  of  prevailing  on  a  dispersed  people  to 
meet  every  year,  as  well  as  the  enhanced  influence  of  the 
kin^  through  his  armed  Antrustions,  soon  reduced  the  free- 
men  to  little  more  than  spectators  from  the  neighboring  dis- 
tricts. We  find  indeed  that  it  was  with  reluctance,  and  by 
means  of  coercive  fines,  that  they  were  induced  to  attend  the 
mallus  of  their  count  for  judicial  purposes.1 

Although  no  legislative  proceedings  of  the  Merovingian 
line  are  extant  after  615,  it  is  intimated  by  early  writers  that 
Pepin  Heristal  and  his  son  Charles  Martel  restored  the 
national  council  after  some  interruption ;  and  if  the  language 
of  certain  historians  be  correct,  they  rendered  it  considerably 
popular.2 

Pepin  the  younger,  after  his  accession  to  the  throne,  chang- 
ed the  month  of  this  annual  assembly  from  March  to  May ; 
and  we  have  some  traces  of  what  took  place  at  eight  sessions 
during  his  reign.8  Of  his  capitularies,  however,  one  only  is 
said  to  be  made  in  generali  populi  conventu  ;  the  rest  are  en- 
acted in  synods  of  bishops,  and  all  without  exception  relate 
merely  to  ecclesiastical  affairs.4  And  it  must  be  owned  that, 
as  in  those  of  the  first  dynasty,  we  find  generally  mention  of 
the  optimates  who  met  in  these  conventions,  but  rarely  any 
word  that  can  be  construed  of  ordinary  freemen. 

Such,  indeed,  is  the  impression  conveyed  by  a  remarkable 
passage  of  Hincmar,  archbishop  of  Rheims,  during  the  time 
of  Charles  the  Bald,  who  has  preserved,  on  the  authority  of  a 
writer  contemporary  with  Charlemagne,  a  sketch  of  the 
Assemblies  Frankish  government  under  that  great  prince 
held  by  Two    assemblies    (placita)    were    annually    held, 

magnet  In  the  first,  all  regulations  of  importance  to  the 

i  Mably  generally  strives  to  make  the  government  only  the  preponderance  of 

most  of  any  vestige  of  popular  govern-  the  kings  during  one  period,  and  that  of 

ment,  and  Sismondi  is  not  exempt  from  the  aristocracy  during  another, 

a  similar  bias.    He  overrates  the  liberties  -  The  first  of  these  Australian  dukes, 

of  the  Franks.    "  Leurs  dues  et  leurs  say  the  Annals  of  Me tz,  "  Singulis  annk 

cointes  etaient  electifs:   leurs   generaux  in  Kalendis Martii  generate  cum  omnibus 

etaientchoisispar  lessoldats,  leurs  grands  Francis,  secundum  priscorum  consuetu- 

juges  ou  maires  par  les  homines  libres  "  dinem.  concilium  agebat."     The  second, 

(vol.  ii.  p.  87.)     But  no  part  of  these  according  to  the  biographer  of  St.  Salvian 

privileges  can  be  inferred  from  the  exist-  —  u  jussit  campum  magnum  parari,  sicut 

ing  histories  or  other  documents.     The  mos  erat   Francorum.     Venerunt  antem 

dukes  and  eounts  were,  as  we  find  by  optimates  et  magistratus,  omnisque  pop- 

Marculfus    and    other    evidence,    solely  ulus."     See   the   quotations   in   Gnizot 

appointed  by  the  crown.     A  great  deal  (Essais  sur  I'Hist.  de  France,  p.  321.  J 

of  personal  liberty  may  have  been  pre-  :J  Essais  sur  I'Hist.  de  France,  p.  324 

•erved  by  means  of  the  local  assemblies  4  Rec.  des  Hist   v.  637 
«f  the  FranKs ;  but  we  find  i*  tba  general 


Feudal  Ststem.    LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  213 

public  weal  for  the  ensuing  year  were  enacted  ;  and  tc 
this,  he  says,  the  whole  body  of  clergy  and  laity  repaired  ; 
the  greater,  to  deliberate  upon  what  was  fitting  to  be  done ; 
and  the  less,  to  confirm  by  their  voluntary  assent,  not  through 
deference  to  power,  or  sometimes  even  to  discuss,  the  resolu- 
tions of  their  superiors.1  In  the  second  annual  assembly  the 
chief  men  and  officers  of  state  were  alone  admitted,  to  consult 
upon  the  most  urgent  affairs  of  government.  They  debated, 
in  each  of  these,  upon  certain  capitularies,  or  short  proposals, 
laid  before  them  by  the  king.  The  clergy  and  nobles  met  in 
separate  chambers,  though  sometimes  united  for  the  purposes 
of  deliberation.  In  these  assemblies,  principally,  I  presume, 
in  the  more  numerous  of  the  two  annually  summoned,  that 
extensive  body  of  laws,  the  capitularies  of  Charlemagne, 
were  enacted.  And  though  it  would  contradict  the  testimony 
just  adduced  from  Hincmar,  to  suppose  that  the  lesser  free- 
holders took  a  very  effective  share  in  public  counsels,  yet 
their  presence,  and  the  usage  of  requiring  their  assent, 
indicate  the  liberal  principles  upon  which  the  system  of 
Charlemagne  was  founded.  It  is  continually  expressed  in  his 
capitularies  and  those  of  his  family  that  they  were  enacted  by 
general  consent.2  In  one  of  Louis  the  Debonair,  we  even 
trace  the  first  germ  of  representative  legislation.  Every 
count  is  directed  to  bring  with  him  to  the  general  assembly 
twelve  Scabini,  if  there  should  be  so  many  in  his  county ;  or, 
if  not,  should  fill  up  the  number  out  of  the  most  respectable 
persons  resident.3  These  Scabini  were  judicial  assessors  of 
the  count,  chosen  by  the  alodial  proprietors,  in  the  county 
court,  or  mallus,  though  generally  on  his  nomination.4 

i  Consuetudo  tunc  temporis  talis  erat,  esse  censuimus.  (a.d.  801.)     Dt  populus 

ut  non  ssepius,  sed  bis  in  anno  placita  interrogetur  de  capitulis    quas  in    lege 

duo  tenerentur.     TJnum,  quando  ordina-  noviter  addita  sunt,  et  postquam  omnes 

batur  status  totius   regni  ad  anni  ver-  consenserint,   subscriptions    et    manu 

tentis  spatiuni ;  quod  ordinatuni  nullus  firmationes  suas  in  ipsis  capitulis  faciant 

eventus  reram,  uisi  summa  necessitas,  (a.d.  813.)    Capitularia  patris  nostri  qua 

quae   similiter    toti    regno    incumbebat,  Franci    pro   lege    tenenda   judicaverunt 

mutabat.      In    quo    placito    generalitas  (a.d.  837.)     I  have  borrowed  these  quo- 

universorum  niajorum,  tani  clericoruui  tations  from  Mably,  who  remarks  that 

quam    laicorum,    conveniebat;    seniores  the  word  populus  is  never  used  in   the 

propter  consilium  ordinandum;  minores.  earlier  laws.    See,  to  ),  Du  Gauge,  w.  Lex, 

propter  idem   consilium    suscipienduui,  Mallum,  Pactum. 

et  interdum  pariter  tractaudum,  et  non  3  Vult  dominus  fmperator  ut  in  tale 

ex  potestate,  sed  ex  proprio  mentis  in-  placitum  quale  ille  nunc  ju^serit.  veniat 

tellectu    vel    sententia,    confirmandum.  unusquisque  comes,  et  adducat  secum 

Hincmar,  Epist.  5.  de  ordine  palatii.     I  duodecim  scabiuos  si  tanti  fuerint ;  sin 

have  not  translated  the  word  niajorum  autem,  de  melioribus  hominibus  illius 

In  the  above  quotation,  not  apprehend-  comitatus  suppleat  numerum  duodena 

Ing  its  sense.     [Note  XVI.]  rium.     Mably,  1.  ii.  c.  ii. 

2  Capitula  quae    praeterito    anno    legi  4  This  seems  to  be  sufficiently  proved 

Salicse  cum  omnium  consensu  addenda  bv  Savigny  (vol.  i.  p    192,  217,  tt  post) 


214 


LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.     Chap.  II.  Pakt  11 


The  ciicumstances,  however,  of  the  French  empire  for  sev- 
eral subsequent  ages  were  exceedingly  adverse  to  such  en- 
larged scheme.-  of  polity.  The  nobles  contemned  the  imbecile 
descendants  of  Charlemagne ;  and  the  people,  or  lesser  free- 
holders, if  they  escaped  absolute  villenage,  lo>t  their  immedi- 
ate relation  to  the  supreme  government  in  the  subordination 
to  their  lord  established  by  the  feudal  law.  Yet  we  may 
trace  the  shadow  of  ancient  popular  rights  in  one  constitution- 
al function  of  high  importance,  the  choice  of  a  sovereign. 
Historians  who  relate  the  election  of  an  emperor  or  king  of 
France  seldom  omit  to  specify  the  consent  of  the  multitude,  as 
well  as  of  the  temporal  and  spiritual  aristocracy;  and  even  in 
solemn  instruments  that  record  such  transactions  we  find  a  sort 
of  importance  attached  to  the  popular  suffrage.1     It  is  surely 


His  opinion  is  adopted  by  Meyer,  Guizot, 
Grimm,  and  Troja.  The  last  of  these  has 
found  Scabini  mentioned  in  Lombardy  aa 
early  as  724;  though  Savigny  had  re- 
jected all  documents  iu  which  they  are 
named  anterior  to  Charlemagne. 

The  Scabini  are  not  to  be  confounded, 
as  sometimes  has  been  the  case,  with  the 
Rachimburgii,  who  were  not  chosen  by 
the  alodial  proprietors,  but  were  them- 
selves such,  or  sometimes,  perhaps,  beue- 
ficiaries,  summoned  by  the  court  as 
jurors  were  in  England.  They  answered 
to  the  prud?  hommes,  boni  homines,  of 
later  times;  they  formed  the  county  or 
the  hundred  court,  for  the  determina- 
tion of  civil  and  criminal  causes.  [Note 
XVI.] 

i  It  has  been  intimated  in  another 
place,  p.  156,  that  the  French  monarchy 
seems  not  to  have  been  strictly  hereditary 
under  the  later  kings  of  the  Merovingian 
race:  at  least  expressions  indicating  a 
lbrmal  election  are  frequently  employed 
by  historiaus.  Pepin  of  course  came  in 
by  the  choice  of  the  nation.  At  his  death 
he  requested  the  consent  of  the  counts 
and  prelates  to  the  succession  of  his  sons 
(Baluzii  Capitularia,  p.  1ST);  though  they 
had  bound  themselves  by  oath  at  his 
consecration  never  to  elect  a  king  out  of 
another  family.  Ut  nunquam  de  alteri- 
us  lumbis  regem  eligere  praesumant. 
(Formula  Consecratiouis  Pippini  in  Ue- 
cueil  des  Historiens,  t.  v.)  In  the  instru- 
ment of  partition  by  Charlemagne  among 
his  descendants  he  provides  for  their  im- 
mediate succession  in  absolute  terms, 
without  any  mention  of  consent.  But 
In  the  event  of  th  of  one  of  his 

sons  leaving  a  child,  whom  the  people 
sliali  choose,  t\i-i  other  princes  were  to 
permit  him  to  reign.  Baluze,  p.  440. 
Cbie  is  repeated  nnre  perspicuously  in 


the  partition  made  by  Louis  I.  in  817. 
Si  quis  eorum  decedens  legitimos  filios 
reliquerit,  non  inter  eos  potestas  ipsa 
dividatur,  sed  potius  populus  pariter 
conveniens,  uuuin  ex  iis,  quern  dominus 
voluerit.  eligat,  et  hunc  senior  frater  in 
loco  fratris  ct  filii  recipiat.  Baluze,  p. 
577-  Proofs  of  popular  consent  given  to 
the  succession  of  kings  during  the  two 
next  centuries  are  frequent,  but  of  less 
importance  on  iccout  of  the  irregular 
condition  of  government.  Even  after 
Hugh  Capet's  accession,  hereditary  right 
was  far  from  being  established.  The  first 
six  kings  of  this  dynasty  procured  the 
cooplntion  of  their  sons  by  having  them 
crowned  during  their  own  lives.  And 
this  was  not  done  without  the  consent 
of  the  chief  vassals.  (Recueil  des  Hist. 
t.  xi.  p.  133.)  In  the  reign  of  Kobert  it 
was  a  great  question  whether  the  elder 
son  should  be  thus  designated  as  heir  in 
preference  to  his  younger  brother,  whom 
the  queen.  Constance,  was  anxious  to 
place  upon  the  throne.  Odolric,  bishop 
of  Orleans,  writes  to  Fulbert,  bishop  of 
Chartres.  in  terms  which  lead  one  to  think 
that  neither  hereditary  succession  nor 
primogeniture  was  settled  on  any  fixed 
principle.  (Id.  t.  x.  p.  604.)  And  a 
writer  iu  the  same  collection,  about  the 
year  1000,  expresses  himself  in  the  fol- 
lowing maniier  :  Melius  eat  elections 
principis  non  subscribere,  quam  post 
suhscriptionem  electum  contemners;  in 
altero  enim  libertatis  amor  Laudator,  in 
altero  servilis  contumacia  probro  datur. 
Tree  namque  generates  electiones  novi- 
mus;  quarum  una  est  regis  Tel  impera. 
toris,  altera  poutiticis.  altera  abbatis.  Et 
primam  quidem  tacit  concordia  totiua 
regni ;  senundam  vero  unanimitas  civium 
et  cleri ;  tertiam  sanius  consilium  coeno- 
biticic  congregationis.     (Id    p.  626. )    Al 


ruuDAi.  Sy3tem.     LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  21ft 

less  probable  that  a  recognition  of  this  elective  right  should 
have  been  introduced  as  a  mere  ceremony,  than  that  the  form 
should  have  survived  after  length  of  time  and  revolutions  of  gov- 
eminent  had  almost  obliterated  the  recollection  of  its  meaning. 

It  must,  however,  be  impossible  to  ascertain  even  the  theo- 
retical privileges  of  the  subjects  of  Charlemagne,  much  more 
to  decide  how  far  the)'  were  substantial  or  illusory.  We  can 
only  assert  in  general  that  there  continued  to  be  some  mix- 
ture of  democracy  in  the  French  constitution  during  the 
reigns  of  Charlemagne  and  his  first  successors.  The  prime- 
val German  institutions  were  not  eradicated.  In  the  capitu- 
laries the  consent  of  the  people  is  frequently  expressed.  Fif- 
ty years  after  Charlemagne,  his  grandson  Charles  the  Bald 
succinctly  expresses  the  theory  of  legislative  power.  A  law, 
he  says,  is  made  by  the  people's  consent  and  the  king's  enact- 
ment.1 It  would  hardly  be  warranted  by  analogy  or  prece- 
dent to  interpret  the  word  people  so  very  narrowly  as  to 
exclude  any  alodial  proprietors,  among  whom,  however  une- 
qual in  opulence,  no  legal  inequality  of  rank  is  supposed  to 
have  yet  arisen. 

But  by  whatever  authority  laws  were  enacted,  whoever  were 
the  constituent  members  of  national  assemblies,  they  ceased 
to  be  held  in  about  seventy  years  from  the  death  of  Charle- 
magne. The  latest  capitularies  are  of  Carloman  in  882.3 
From  this  time  there  ensues  a  long  blank  in  the  history  of 
French  legislation.  The  kingdom  was  as  a  great  fief,  or 
rather  as  a  bundle  of  fiefs,  and  the  king  little  more  than  one 
of  a  number  of  feudal  nobles,  differing  rather  in  dignity  than 
in  power  from  some  of  the  rest.     The  royal  council  was  com- 

the  coronation  of  Philip  I.,  in  1059,  the  375).     Even  Charles  V.  called  himself,  oi 

nobility  and  people  (milites  et  populi  tarn  was  called  by  some,  duke  of  Normandy 

majores   quam   niinores  )    testified   their  until  his  coronation  ;  but  all  the  lawyers 

consent  by  crying,  Laudamus,  voluinus,  called  him  king  (xi.  6).     The  lawyers  had 

fiat.    T.  xi.  p.  33.     I   suppose,    if  search  established   their  maxim  that    the  king 

were  made,  that  similar  testimonies  might  never   dies;    which,    however,   was    un- 

be  found  still  later;  and  perhaps  heredi-  known  while  any  traces  of  elective  mon 

tary  succession  cannot  be  considered  as  archy  remained. 

a  fundamental  law  till  the  reign  of  Phil-  ;  Lex  consensu  populi  fit,  coustitutione 

ip  Augustus,  the   era  of  many  changes  regis.     Recueil  des  Hist.  t.  vii.  p.  656. 

in  the  French  constitution.  -  It  is  generally  said  that  the  capitula- 

Sismondi  has  gone  a  great  deal  farther  ries  cease  with  Charles  the  Simple,  who 

lown,  and  observes   that,  though  John  died  in  921.     But   Balusse  has  published 

assumed  the  royal  power  immediately  on  only  two  under  the  name  of  that  prince; 

the  death  of  his  father,  in  1350,  he  did  the   first,   a  declaration   of   his   queen's 

not  take  the  name  of  king,  nor  any  seal  jointure  ;  the  second,  au  arbitration  of 

but    that    of   duke  of   Normandy,     till  disputes  in  the  church  of  Tongres;  nei- 

his  coronation.     He  says,  however.  "  no-  ther,  surely,  deserving  the  appellation  <>i 

^39  royaume'*    in   his    instruments  (x.  a  law. 


216  ASSEMBLIES   OF   BARONS.      Chap.  11    Pakt  IL 

posed  only  of  barons,  or  tenants  in  chief,  prelates,  and  house* 
hold  officers.  These  now  probably  deliberated  in  private, 
as  we  hear  no  more  of  the  consenting  multitude.  Political 
functions  were  not  in  that  age  so  clearly  separated  as  we  are 
Royal  taught  to  fancy  they   should  be;  this  council  ad- 

the°hirdf  vised  the  king  in  matters  of  government,  confirmed 
race.  and  consented  to  his  grants,  and  judged  in  all  civil 

and  criminal  cases  where  any  peers  of  their  court  were  con- 
cerned.1 The  great  vassals  of  the  crown  acted  for  them- 
selves  in  their  own  territories,  with  the  assistance  of  councils 
similar  to  that  of  the  king.  Such,  indeed,  was  the  symmetry 
of  feudal  customs,  that  the  manorial  court  of  every  vavassor 
represented  in  miniature  that  of  his  sovereign."2 

But,  notwithstanding  the  want  of  any  permanent  legislation 
during  so  long  a  period,  instances  occur  in  which  the  kings  of 
France  appear  to  have  acted  with  the  concurrence  of  an  as- 
sembly more  numerous  and  more  particularly  summoned  than 
Occasional  ^ie  roval  council.  At  such  a  congress  held  in  1146 
assemblies  the  crusade  of  Louis  VII.  was  undertaken.3  We 
find  also  an  ordinance  of  the  same  prince  in  some 
collections,  reciting  that  he  had  convoked  a  general  assembly 
at  Soissons,  where  many  prelates  and  baron<  then  present  had 
consented  and  requested  that  private  wars  might  cease  for  the 
term  of  ten  years.4  The  ftunous  Saladine  tithe  was  imposed 
upon  lay  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  revenues  by  a  similar  con- 
vention in   11S8.5     And  when  Innocent  IV.,  during  his  con- 

iRegalipotentiainnulloabuti  volentes,  4  Ego  Lutjovicus  Dei  gratia  Francoruin 

says  Hugh  Capet,  omnia  negotia  reipub-  rex,  ad  reprimendum  fervorem  malignan- 

licse  in  consultatioueetsententiafidelium  tiuin,  et  compescendam  violeutas  praedo- 

nostrorum  disponimus.  Recueil  des  Hist,  rum  inanus,  postulationibus  cleri  et  as- 

t.  x.  p.  392.  The  subscriptions  of  these  roy-  sensu  baroniae,  toti  regno  pacem  consti- 

al  councillors  were  necessary  for  the  con-  tuimus.     Ea  causa,  anno  Incarnati  Verbi 

firmation,  or,  at  least,  the  authentication  1155,  iv.   idus   Jun.     Suessiouense   con- 

of  charters,  as  was  also  the  case  in  Eng-  cilium  celebre  adunavimus,  et  effuerunt 

land,  Spain,  and  Italy.    This  practice  con-  archiepiscopi    Remensis,    Senonensia    et 

tinued  In  England  till  the  reign  of  John,  eorum  suffraganei :  item  barones,  comes 

The  Curia  regis  seems  to  have  differed  Flandrensis.  Treeensis,  et  Nivernensia  et 
only  in  name  from  the  Concilium  regiuui.  quampiures  alii,  et  dux  Burgundies.  Ex 
It  is  also  called  Curia  parium,  from  the  quorum  beueplacito  ordinavimus  a  ve- 
equality  of  the  barons  who  composed  it,  nieute  Pascha  ad  decern  annos,  ut  oinnes 
standing  in  the  same  feudal  degree  of  re-  ecclesiae  regui  et  omnes  agricolae,  etc 
lation  to  the  sovereign.  But  we  are  not  pacem  habeant  et  securitatem.  —  In  pa- 
yet  arrived  at  the  subject  of  jurisdiction,  cem  istain  juraverunt  dux  Burguudiae 

which  it  is  very  difficult  to  keep  distinct     comes  Flandriaa. et  reliqui  baroned 

from  what  is  immediately  before  us.  qui  aderant. 

-  Recueil  dea  lli^t.   t.   xi.  p.  300,  and  This   ordinance    is    published    in    Du 

preface,  p.  179.     Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Lan-  Chesne,  Script.  Rerum  Qallicarum,  t.  iv.. 

guedoc,  t.  ii.  p.  508.  ami  in  Recueil  des  Histor.  t.  \iv.  p  387; 

3  Velly,  t.  hi.  p.  119.     This,  he  observes,  but  not  in  the  general  collection, 

is  the  first  instance  in  which  the  word  par-  5  Velly,  t.  iii.  p.  315. 
Uament  is  used  for  a  deliberati ve  assembly. 


BKVDALSYsrEM.  PLENARY   COURTS.  217 

test  with  the  emperor  Frederic,  requested  an  asylum  in  France, 
St.  Louis,  though  much  inclined  to  favor  him,  ventured  only 
to  give  a  conditional  permission,  provided  it  were  agreeable 
to  his  barons,  whom,  he  said,  a  king  of  France  was  bound  to 
consult  in  such  circumstances.  Accordingly  he  assembled 
the  French  barons,  who  unanimously  refused  their  consent.1 

It  was  the  ancient  custom  of  the  kings  of  France  as  well  as 
of  England,  and  indeed  of  all  those  vassals  who  cours 
affected  a  kind  of  sovereignty,  to  hold  general  meet-  P1«iieres. 
ings  of  their  barons,  called  Cours  Plenieres,  or  Parliament*, 
at  the  great  festivals  of  the  year.  These  assemblies  were 
principally  intended  to  make  a  display  of  magnificence,  and  to 
keep  the  feudal  tenants  in  good  humor  ;  nor  is  it  easy  to  dis- 
cover that  they  passed  in  anything  but  pageantry.2  Some 
respectable  antiquaries  have  however  been  of  opinion  that 
affairs  of  state  were  occasionally  discussed  in  them  ;  and  this 
is  certainly  by  no  means  inconsistent  with  probability,  though 
not  sufficiently  established  by  evidence.3 

Excepting  a  few  instances,  most  of  which  have  been  men- 
tioned, it  does  not  appear  that  the  kings  of  the  house  of  Capet 
acted  according  to  the  advice  and  deliberation  of  any  national 
assembly,  such  as  assisted  the  Norman  sovereigns  of  England  : 
nor  was  any  consent  required  for  the  validity  of  their  edicts 
except  that  of  the  ordinary  council,  chiefly  formed  of  their 
household  officers  and  less  powerful  vassals.  This  is  at  first 
sight  very  remarkable.  For  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
government  of  Henry  I.  or  Henry  II.  was  incomparably 
stronger  than  that  of  Louis  VI.  or  Louis  VII.  But  this 
apparent  absoluteness  of  the  latter  was  the  result  of  their  real 
weakness  and  the  disorganization  of  the  monarch}-.  The  peers 
of  France  were  infrequent  in  their  attendance  upon  the  king'- 
council,  because  they  denied  its  coercive  authority.  Limitations 
It  was  a  fundamental  principle  that  every  feudal  ^0™-Tfn 
tenant  was  so  far  sovereign  within  the  limits  of  his  legislation. 
fief,  that  he  could  not  be  bound  by  any  law  without  his  con- 
sent. The  king,  says  St.  Louis  in  his  Establishments,  cannot 
make  proclamation,  that  is,  declare  any  new  law,  in  the  terri- 
tory of  a  baron,  without  his  consent,  nor  can  the  baron  do  so 
in  that  of  a  vavassor.4    Thus,  if  legislative  power  be  essential 

1  Velly,  t.  iv.  p.  306.  terre  au  baron  sans  son  assentment,  ne  1J 

2  Du  Gauge,  Dissert.  5.  sur  Joinville.  bers  [baron]  ne  piu-t  mettre  ban  en  la 

3  Mem.  de  FAoud.  des  Inscript.  t.  xli.  terre  au  vavasor.    Ordou nances  desltois, 
Recueil  des  Hist.  t.  xi.  preface,  p.  155.  t.  i.  p.  126. 

4  Ne  li  rois  ne  puet  mettre  ban  en  la 


f)8  LEGISLATIVE  SUBSTITUTES.     Chap    II.  Pabi  H 

to  sovereignty,  we  cannot  in  strictness  assert  the  king  of 
France  to  have  been  sovereign  beyond  the  extent  of  his 
domanial  territory.  Nothing  can  more  strikingly  illustrate 
the  dissimilitude  of  the  French  and  English  constitutions  of 
government  than  the  sentence  above  cited  from  the  code  of 
St.  Louis. 

Upon  occasions  when  the  necessity  of  common  deliberation, 
Substitutes  or  of  giving  to  new  provisions  more  extensive  -cope 
Stii?18"  tuan  tne  limits  °f  a  single  fief,  was  too  glaring  to  be 
authority.  overlooked,  congresses  of  neighboring  lords  met  in 
order  to  agree  upon  resolutions  which  each  of  them  undertook 
to  execute  within  his  own  domains.  The  king  was  sometimes 
a  contracting  party,  but  without  any  coercive  authority  over 
the  rest.  Thus  we  have  what  is  called  an  ordinance,  but,  in 
reality,  an  agreement,  between  the  king  (Philip  Augustus), 
the  countess  of  Troyes  or  Champagne,  and  the  lord  of  Dam- 
pierre,1  relating  to  the  Jews  in  their  domains  ;  which  agree- 
ment or  ordinance,  it  is  said,  should  endure  "  until  ourselves, 
and  the  countess  of  Troyes,  and  Guy  de  Dampierre,  who  make 
this  contract,  shall  dissolve  it  with  the  consent  of  such  of  our 
barons  as  we  shall  summon  for  that  purpose."  2 

Ecclesiastical  councils  were  another  substitute  for  a  regular 
legislature  ;  and  this  defect  in  the  political  constitution  ren- 
dered their  encroachments  less  obnoxious,  and  almost  unavoid- 
able. That  of  Troyes  in  878,  composed  perhaps  in  part  of 
laymen,  imposed  a  fine  upon  the  invaders  of  church  property.8 
And  the  council  of  Toulouse,  in  1229,  prohibited  the  erection 
of  any  new  fortresses,  or  the  entering  into  any  leagues,  except 
against  the  enemies  of  religion  ;  and  ordained  that  judges 
should  administer  justice  gratuitously,  and  publish  the  decrees 
of  the  council  four  times  in  the  year.4 

First  The  first  unequivocal  attempt,  for  it  was  nothing 

•funeral       niore,  at  general  legislation,  was  under  Louis  VIII. 
legislation      in  1223,  in  an  ordinance  which,   like  several  of 

I  In  former  editions  I  have  called  the       ,2  Quosque  nos,  et  comitissa  Trecensis, 

lord  of   Dampierre   count  of   Flanders,  et  Guido  de  Domna  petra,  qui  hoc  faci- 

But  it  has  been  suggested  to  me   that  mus,  per  nos,  et  illos  de  baronibus  nos- 

the  lord  of  Dampierre  was  never  count  tris,  quos  ad  hoc  vonare  volumus.  illud 

of  Flanders  ;  his  Becond  brother  married  diffaciamus.     Ordonnances  des  Kois,  t.  i. 

the  younger  sister  of  the  heiress  of  that  p.  29.    This  ordinance  bears  no  date,  but 

fief,  who,  after  his   death,   inherited   it  it  was  probably  between  1218  and  1223. 

from  the  elder.    The  ordinance  related  to  the  year  of  Philip's  death. 
the  domains  of  Dampierre,  in  the  Niver-        3  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc.   t.  i! 

nois.    This,  however,  makes  the  instance  p.  6. 
stronger  against  the  legislative  authority        *  Velly,  t.  iv.  p.  132. 
of  the  oro  wn  than  as  I  had  stated  it. 


Feupai,  System.  INCREASE  OF  POWER  OF  THE  CROWN.   21S 

that  ago,  relate-  to  the  condition  and  usurious  dealings  of  the 
Jews.  It- is  declared  in  the  preamble  to  have  been  enacted 
per  assensum  archiepiscoporum,  episcoporum,  comitum,  ba- 
ronum,  et  militum  regni  Fratnciae,  qui  Judaeos  habent,  et  qui 
Judaeos  non  habent.  This  recital  is  probably  untrue,  and  in- 
tended to  cloak  the  bold  innovation  contained  in  the  last  clause 
of  the  following  provision  :  Sciendum,  quod  nos  et  barones 
nostri  statuimus  et  ordinavimus  de  statu  Judseorum  quod  nul- 
lus  nostrum  alterius  Judasos  recipere  potest  vei  retinere ;  et 
hoc  intettigendum  est  tarn  de  his  qui  stabilimentum  jurwwin* 
quam  de  Mis  qui  non  juraverint.1  This  was  renewed  with 
some  alteration  in  1230,  de  communi  consilio  baronum  nos- 
trorum.2 

But  whatever  obedience  the  vassals  of  the  crown  might  pay 
to  this  ordinance,  their  original  exemption  from  legislative 
control  remained,  as  we  have  seen,  unimpaired  at  the  date  of 
the  Establishments  of  St.  Louis,  about  1269  ;  and  their  ill- 
judged  confidence  in  this  feudal  privilege  still  led  them  to 
absent  themselves  from  the  royal  council.  It  seems  impossible 
to  doubt  that  the  barons  of  France  might  have  asserted  the 
same  right  which  those  of  England  had  obtained,  that  of  being 
duly  summoned  by  special  writ,  and  thus  have  rendered  their 
consent  necessary  to  every  measure  of  legislation.  But  the 
fortunes  of  France  were  different.  The  Establishments  of 
St.  Louis  are  declared  to  be  made  "par  grand  conseil  de 
sages  hommes  et  de  bons  clers,"  but  no  mention  is  made  of 
any  consent  given  by  the  barons  ;  nor  does  it  often,  if  ever, 
occur  in  subsequent  ordinances  of  the  French  kings. 

The  nobility  did  not  long  continue  safe  in  their  immunity 
from  the  king's  legislative  power.     In  the  ensuing 
reign  of  Philip  the  Bold,  Beaumanoir  lays  it  down,  powerofVe 
though  in  very  moderate  and  doubtful  terms,  that  *he  crown 
"  when  the  king  makes  any  ordinance  specially  for 
his  own  domains,  the  barons  do  not  cease  to  act  in  their 
territories  according  to  the  ancient  usage ;  but  when  the  ordi- 
nance is  general,  it  ought  to  run  through  the  whole  kingdom, 
and   we  ought  to  believe  that  it  is  made   with  good  advice, 
and  for  the   common  benefit." 8     In  another  place  he  says, 
with  more  positiveness,  that  "  the  king  is  sovereign  above  all. 
and  has  of  right  the  general  custody  of  the  realm,  for  which 

i  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  47.  s  Coutumtb  de  Beauvoisia,  :    48. 

« Id.  p.  63. 


220   INCREASE  OF  POWER  OF  THE  CROWS.    Cuap.1I.  PaktII 

cause  he  may  make  what  ordinances  he  pleases  for  the  com- 
mon good,  and  what  he  ordains  ought  to  be  observed  ;  nor  is 
there  anyone  so  great  but  may  be  drawn  into  the  king's  court 
for  default  of  right  or  for  false  judgment,  or  in  matters  that 
affect  the  sovereign."  '  These  latter  words  give  us  a  clue  to 
Causes  of  the  solution  of  the  problem  by  what  means  an 
this-  absolute    monarchy    was    established    in    France. 

For  though  the  barons  would  have  been  little  influenced  by 
the  authority  of  a  lawyer  like  Beaumanoir,  they  were  much 
less  able  to  resist  the  coercive  logic  of  a  judicial  tribunal.  It 
was  in  vain  for  them  to  deny  the  obligation  of  royal  ordi- 
nances within  their  own  domains,  when  they  were  com- 
pelled to  acknowledge  the  jurisdiction  of  the  parliament  of 
Paris,  which  took  a  very  different  view  of  their  privileges. 
This  progress  of  the  royal  jurisdiction  will  fall  under  the  next 
topic  of  inquiry,  and  is  only  now  hinted  at,  as  the  probable 
means  of  confirming  the  absolute  legislative  power  of  the 
French  crown. 

The  ultimate  source,  however,  of  this  increased  authority 
will  be  found  in  the  commanding  attitude  assumed  by  the 
kings  of  France  from  the  reign  of  Philip  Augustus,  and  par- 
ticularly in  the  annexation  of  the  two  great  fiefs  of  Nor- 
mandy and  Toulouse.  Though  the  chatelains  and  vavassors 
who  had  depended  upon  those  fiefs  before  their  reunion  were, 
agreeably  to  the  text  of  St.  Louis's  ordinance,  fully  sovereign, 
in  respect  of  legislation,  within  their  territories,  yet  they  were 
little  competent,  and  perhaps  little  disposed,  to  offer  any  op- 
.  position  to  the  royal  edicts ;  and  the  same  relative  superiority 
of  force,  which  had  given  the  first  kings  of  the  house  of  Capet 
a  tolerably  effective  control  over  the  yassals  dependent  on 
Paris  and  Orleans,  while  they  hardly  pretended  to  any  over 
Normandy  and  Toulouse,  was  now  extended  to  the  greater 
part  of  the  kingdom.  St.  Louis,  in  his  scrupulous  moder- 
ation, forbore  to  avail  himself  of  all  the  advantages  presented 
by  the  circumstances  of  his  reign  :  and  his  Establishment 
bear  testimony  to  a  state  of  political  society  which,  even  at 
the  moment  of  their  promulgation,  was  passing  away.  The 
next  thirty  years  after  his  death,  with  no  marked  crisis,  and 

1  C.  34.     Beaumanoir  u?es  in  one  place  service,    bo   that   he  may  enforce    then: 

still  stronger  language  about  the  royal  :              For   what  it  pleases  him  '■■ 

authority.     The  king,  he  says,  may  an-  ought  to  be  held  as  law  "  (c.  o"»).     This  I 

nul  ths  releases  of  debts  made  by  any  owe  to  the  new  edition  of  the  "  Coiitumei 

one   who  accompanies   him   in  military  de  Beaumanoir,"  hy  M.  Beugnot,  1842 


Feudal  System.  STATES-GENERAL.  22 j 

with  little  disturbance,  silently  demolished  the  feudal  system 
such  a-  had  been  established  in  France  during  the  dark  con- 
fusion  of  the  tenth  century.  Philip  the  Fair,  by  help  of  his 
lawyers  and  his  financiers,  found  himself,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  the  real  master  of  his  subject-.1 

There    was,   however,   one    essential    privilege    which    he 
could  not  hope  to  overturn  by  force,  the  immunity  convocation 
from  taxation  enjoyed  bv  his  barons.     This,  it  will  oftheState*- 

i  t  t       i  c  General  by 

be  remembered,  embraced  the  whole  extent  ot  Philip  the 
their  fiefs,  and  their  tenantry  of  every  description  ;  Fsur' 
the  king  having  no  more  right  to  impose  a  tallage  upon  the 
demesne  towns  of  his  vassals  than  upon  themselves.  Thus 
his  resources,  in  point  of  taxation,  were  limited  to  his  own 
domains  ;  including  certainly,  under  Philip  the  Fair,  many  of 
the  noblest  cities  in  France,  but  by  no  means  sufficient 
to  meet  his  increasing  necessities.  We  have  seen  already 
the  expedients  employed  by  this  rapacious  monarch  —  a 
shameless  depreciation  of  the  coin,  and,  what  was  much  more 
justifiable,  the  levying  taxes  within  the  territories  of  his  vas- 
sals by  their  consent.  Of  these  measures,  the  first  was  odious, 
the  second  slow  and  imperfect.  Confiding  in  his  sovereign 
authority  —  though  recently,  yet  almost  completely,  estab- 
lished—  and  little  apprehensive  of  the  feudal  principles,  al- 
ready grown  obsolete  and  discountenanced,  he  was  bold  enough 
to  make  an  extraordinary  innovation  in  the  French  constitution. 
This  was  the  convocation  of  the  States-General,  a  representa 
tive  body,  composed  of  the  three  orders  of  the  nation.'2     They 

1  The  reign  of  Philip  the  Fair  has  been  uties  of  towns  were  present  at  a  parlia 
very  well  discussed  by  Mably,  Sismondi,  ment  in  1241,  to  advise  the  king  what 
and  Guizot.  "He  change!,"  says  the  should  be  done  in  consequence  of  the 
last,  "monarchy  iuto  despotism;  but  he  count  of  Angouleme's  refusal  of  homage 
was  not  one  of  those  despots  who  employ  Boulainvilliers,  Hist,  de  L'Ancien  Gou 
their  absolute  power  for  the  public  good."  vernement  df>  France,  t.  ii.  p.  20  :  Vil 
"  On  ne  rencontre  dans  tout  le  cours  de  laret,  t.  ix.  p.  125.  The  latter  pretend* 
son  regno  aucune  idee  generate,  et  qui  even  that  they  may  be  traced  a  century 
s'y  rapporte  au  bien  de  ses  sujets ;  e'est  farther  back;  on  voit  dejk  les  yens  de 
un  despote  egoi'ste,  devoue  a  lui-meme  bonnes  villes  assister  aux  etats  de  1146. 
qui  regue  pour  lui  seul."  (Lecon  45.)  Ibid.  But  he  quotes  no  authority  for 
The  royal  authority  gained  so  much  this  :  and  bis  vague  language  does  not 
ascendency  in  his  reign,  that,  while  we  justify  us  in  supposing  that  any  repre- 
have  only  50  ordonnances  of  St.  Louis  in  sentation  of  the  three  est  ires,  properly 
forty-two  years,  we  have  334  of  Philip  so  understood,  did,  or  indeed  could,  tak« 
IV    in  about  thirty.  place   iu   1145.  while  the  power   of  the 

2  It  is  almost  unanimously  agreed  aristocracy  was  unbroken,  and  very  few 
among  French  writers  that  Philip  the  towns  had  been  incorporated.  If  it  be 
Fair  first  introduced  a  representation  of  true  that  the  deputies  of  some  royal 
the  tosvns  into  his  national  assembly  of  towns  were  summoned  to  the  parliament 
States-General.  Nevertheless,  the  Chiron-  of  1241,  the  conclusion  must  not  be  in- 
Ides  of  St.  Denis,  and  other  historians  ferred  that  they  possessed  any  consent' 
>f  rather  a  late  dale,  assert  that  the  dep-  ing  voice,  nor  perhaps  that  they  formed 


222 


STATES-GENERAL. 


Chap.   II.   Part  II. 


were  first  convened  in  1302,  in  order  to  give  more  weight  to 
the  king's  cause  in  his  great  quarrel  with  Boniface  VIII. ;  but 
their  earliest  grant  of  a  subsidy  is  in  1314.  Thus  the  nobility 
surrendered  to  the  crown  their  last  privilege  of  territorial  in- 
dependence;  and,  having  first  submitted  to  its  appellant  juris- 
diction over  their  tribunals,  next  to  its  legislative  supremacy, 
now  suffered  their  own  dependents  to  become,  as  it  were, 
immediate,  and  a  third  estate  to  rise  up  almost  coordinate 
with  themselves,  endowed  with  new  franchises,  and  bearing  a 
new  relation  to  the  monarchy. 

It  is  impossible  not  to  perceive  the  motives  of  Philip  in 
embodying  the  deputies  of  towns  as  a  separate  estate  in  the 
national  representation.  He  might,  no  question,  have  con- 
voked a  parliament  of  his  barons,  and  obtained  a  pecuniary 
contribution,  which  they  would  have  levied  upon  their  bur- 
gesses and  other  tenants.  But,  besides  the  ulterior  policy  of 
diminishing  the  control  of  the  barons  over  their  dependents, 


strictly  speaking,  an  integrant  portion  of 
the  assembly.  There  is  reason  to  believe 
that  deputies  from  the  royal  burghs  of 
Scotlaud  occasionally  appeared  at  the  bar 
of  parliament  long  before  they  had  any 
deliberative  voice. —  Pinkertou's  Hist,  of 
Scotland,  vol.  i.  p.  371. 

An  ordinance  of  St  Louis,  quoted  in 
a  very  respectable  book,  Vaissette's  His- 
tory of  Lauguedoc,  t.  hi.  p.  480,  but 
not  published  in  the  Recueil  des  Ordon- 
nances,  not  only  shows  the  existence,  in 
one  instance,  of  a  provincial  legislative 
Hssembly,  but  is  the  earliest  proof  per- 
haps uf  the  tiers  etat  appealing  as  a  con- 
stituent part  of  it.  This  relates  to  the 
seneschaussee,  or  county,  of  Beaucaire  in 
LangUedoc,  and  bears  date  in  1254.  It 
provides  that,  if  the  seneschal  shall  think 
nt  to  prohibit  the  export  of  merchandise, 
lie  shall  summon  some  of  the  prelates, 
barons,  knights,  and  inhabitants  of  the 
chief  towus,  by  whose  advice  he  shall 
issue  such  prohibition,  and  uot  recall  it, 
when  made,  without  like  advice.  But 
though  it  is  interesting  to  see  the  pro- 
gressive  importance  of  the  citizens  of 
town-,  yet  this  temporary  and  insulated 
ordinance  is  not  of  itself  sufficient  to 
establish  a  constitutional  right.  Neither 
do  we  find  therein  any  evidence  of  rep- 
resentation; it  rather  appears  that  the 
persons  assisting  in  this  assembly  were 
notables,  selected  by  the  seneschal. 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  instance  of 
regular  provincial  estates  being  sum- 
moned with  such  full  powers,  although 
it  was  very  common  in  the  fourteenth 
eeutury  to  ask  their  consent  to  grants  of 


money,  when  the  court  was  unwilling  to 
convoke  the  States-General.  Yet  there 
is  a  passage  in  a  book  of  considerable 
credit,  the  Grand  Customary,  or  Somme 
Rurale  of  Bouteiller,  which  seems  to 
render  general  the  particular  case  of  the 
seneschaussee  of  Beaucaire.  Bouteiller 
wrote  about  the  end  of  the  fourteenth 
century.  The  great  courts  summoned 
from  time  to  time  by  the  baillis  and 
seneschals  were  called  assises.  Their 
usual  function  was  to  administer  justice, 
especially  by  way  of  appeal,  and  perhaps 
to  redress  abuses  of  inferior  officers.  But 
he  seems  to  give  them  a  more  extended 
authority.  En  assise,  he  says,  appelles, 
lee  sages  et  seigneurs  du  pais,  peuvent 
estre  mises  sus  uouvelles  constitutions, 
et  ordonnances  sur  le  pais  et  destruitee 
autre  que  seront  grevables,  et  en  autre 
te?nps  non,  et  doivent  etre  publiees  satin 
que  nul  ne  les  pueust  ignorer.  et  lora  ne 
les  peut  ne  doit  jamais  nul  redarguer. — 
Mem.  del'Acad.  des  Inscriptions,  t.  xxx. 
p.  606. 

The  taille  was  assessed  by  respectable 
persons  chosen  by  the  advice  of  the  parish 
priests  and  others,  which  gave  tLe  people 
a  sort  of  share  in  the  repartition^  to  use 
a  French  term,  of  public  burdens;  a 
matter  of  no  small  importance  where  a 
tax  is  levied  on  visible  property.  Ordon- 
nances des  Kois,  p. .291;  Beaumanoir, 
p.  2(39.  This,  however,  continued,  1  be- 
lieve, to  he  the  practice  in  later  times, 
1  know  it  is  so  in  the  present  system  of 
France,  and  is  perfectly  distinguishable 
from  a  popular  consent  to  taxation. 


Feudal  System.  STATES-GENERAL.  223 

he  had  good  reason  to  expect  more  liberal  aid  from  the  im- 
mediate representatives  of  the  people  than  through  the  con- 
cession of  a  dissatisfied  aristocracy.  "  He  must  be  blind, 
indeed,"  says  Pasquier,  "  who  does  not  see  that  the  roturier 
was  express!}-  summoned  to  this  assembly,  contrary  to  the 
ancient  institutions  of  France,  for  no  other  reason  than  that, 
inasmuch  as  the  burden  was  intended  to  fall  principally  upon 
him,  he  might  engage  himself  so  far  by  promise,  that  he  could 
not  afterwards  murmur  or  become  refractory."  1  Nor  would 
I  deny  the  influence  of  more  generous  principles  ;  the  ex- 
ample of  neighboring  countries,  the  respect  due  to  the  pro- 
gressive civilization  and  opulence  of  the  towns,  and  the  appli- 
cation of  that  ancient  maxim  of  the  northern  monarchies,  thai 
whoever  was  elevated  to  the  perfect  dignity  of  a  freeman  ac- 
quired a  claim  to  participate  in  the  imposition  of  jDublic 
tributes.     - 

It  i-  very  difficult  to  ascertain  the  constitutional  rights  of  the 
States-General,  claimed  or  admitted,  during  forty  Rights  of 
years  after  their  first  convocation.     If,  indeed,  we  ^eraf  as 
could  implicitly  confide  in  an  historian  of  the  six-  t0  taxation, 
teenth  century,  who  asserts  that  Louis  Hutin  bound  himself 
and  his  successors  not  to  levy  any  tax  without  the  consent  of 
the  three  estates,  the  problem  would  find  its  solution.2     This 
ample  charter  does  not  appear  in   the  French  archives ;  and. 
though  by  no  means  to  be  rejected  on  that  account,  when  we 
consider  the  strong  motives  for  its  destruction,  cannot  fairly 
be  adduced  as  an  authentic  fact.     Nor  can  we  altogether  infer, 
perhaps,  from. the  collection  of  ordinances,  that  the  crown  had 
ever  intentionally  divested  itself  of  the  right  to  impose  tallages 
on  its  domanial  tenants.     All  others,  however,  were  certainly 
exempted  from  that  prerogative ;  and  there  seems   to  have 
been  a  general  sentiment  that  no  tax  whatever  could  be  levied 
without  free  consent  of  the  estates.3     Louis  Hutin,  in  a  char- 
ter granted  to  the  nobles  and  burgesses  of  Picardy,  promises 
to  abolish  the  unjust  taxes  (maltotes)  imposed  by  his  father;4 
and  in  another  instrument,  called  the  charter  of  Normandy, 

1  Recherches  de  la  France,  1.  ii.  c.  7.  to  impose  taxes.    Montlosier  (Monarchic 

2  Boulainvilliers  (Hist,  de  l'Anc.  Gou-  Franchise,  t.  i.  p.  202)  is  of  the  same 
rernement,  t.  ii.  p  128)  refers  for  this  to  opiuion.  In  fact,  there  is  reason  to  be- 
Nicholas  Gilles,  a  chronicler  of  no  great  lieve  that  the  kings  in  general  did  not 
repute.  claim  that  prerogative  absolutely,  what- 

3  Mably,  Observat.  sur  PHist.  de  France,  ever  pretexts  they  might  set  up  for  occi* 
1.    v.   c.   1,   is  positive  against   the  right  sional  stretches  of  power. 

of   Philip    the   Fair    and   his    successors        4  Ordonnauces  des  Kois,  t.  i.  p.  566, 


224  STATES-GENERAL.         Chap.  II.  Part  n 

declares  that  he  renounce?  for  himself  and  his  successors  all 
undue  tallages  and  exactions,  except  in  case  of  evident  utility.1 
This  exception  is  doubtless  of  perilous  ambiguity;  yet,  as  the 
charter  was  literally  wrested  from  the  king  by  an  insurrec- 
tionary league,  it  might  be  expected  that  the  same  spirit  would 
rebel  again-!  his  royal  interpretation  of  state-necessity.  His 
successor,  Philip  the  Long,  tried  the  experiment  of  a  gabelle, 
or  excise  upon  salt.  But  it  produced  so  much  discontent  that 
he  was  compelled  to  assemble  the  States- General,  and  to  pub- 
lish an  ordinance,  declaring  that  the  impost  was  not  designed 
to  be  perpetual,  and  that,  if  a  sufficient  supply  for  the  existing 
war  could  be  found  elsewhere,  it  should  instantly  determine.1* 
Whether  this  was  done  I  do  not  discover  ;  nor  do  I  conceive 
that  any  of  the  sons  of  Philip  the  Fair,  inheriting  much  of  his 
rapacity  and  ambition,  abstained  from  extorting  money  with- 
out consent.  Philip  of  Valois  renewed  and  augmented  the 
duties  on  salt  by  his  own  prerogative,  nor  had  the  abuse  of 
debasing  the  current  coin  been  ever  carried  to  such  a  height 
as  during  his  reign  and  the  first  years  of  his  successor.  These 
exactions,  aggravated  by  the  smart  of  a  hostile  invasion,  pro- 
duced a  very  remarkable  concussion  in  the  government  of 
France. 

I  have  been  obliged  to  advert,  in  another  place,  to  the 
states-  memorable  resistance  made  by  the  States-General 

of'iSs  °f  1355  and  1356  to  the  royal  authority,  on  account 
and  1356.  0f  its  inseparable  connection  with  the  civil  history 
of  France.8  In  the  present  chapter  the  assumption  of  politi- 
cal influence  by  those  assemblies  deserves  particular  notice. 
Not  that  they  pretended  to  restore  the  ancient  constitution  of 
th3  northern  nations,  still  flourishing  in  Spain  and  England, 
the  participation  of  legislative  power  with  the  crown.  Five 
hundred  years  of  anarchy  and  ignorance  had  swept  awray  all 
remembrance  of  those  general  diets  in  which  the  capitularies 
of  the  Carlovingian  dynasty  had  been  established  by  common 
consent.  Charlemagne  himself  was  hardly  known  to  the 
French  of  the  fourteenth  century,  except  as  the  hero  of  some 
silly  romance  or  ballad.  The  States-General  remonstrated, 
indeed,  against  abuses,  and  especially  the  most  flagrant  of  all, 
the  adulteration  of  money  ;  but  the  ordinance  granting  redress 
emanated  altogether  from   the  king,  and  without  the   least 

1  Ordonnain-«->  dee  Hois,  t.  i.  p.  679.  3  Chap.  1.  p.  66. 

a  Idem,  t.  i.  p.  589. 


fkudal  System.  STATES-GENERAL.  225 

reference  to  their  consent,  which  sometimes  Appears  to  be 
studiously  omitted.1  But  the  privilege  upon  which  the  States 
under  John  solely  relied  for  securing  the  redress  of  grievances 
was  that  of  granting  money,  and  of  regulating  its  collection. 
The  latter,  indeed,  though  for  convenience  it  may  be  devolved 
upon  the  executive  government,  appears  to  be  incident  to 
every  assembly  in  which  the  right  of  taxation  resides.  That, 
accordingly,  which  met  in  1355  nominated  a  committee  chosen 
out  of  the  three  orders,  which  was  to  sit  after  their  separation, 
and  which  the  king  bound  himself  to  consult,  not  only  as  to 
the  internal  arrangements  of  his  administration,  but  upon 
every  proposition  of  peace  or  armistice  with  England.  Dep- 
uties were  despatched  into  each  district  to  superintend  the 
collection  and  receive  the  produce  of  the  subsidy  granted  by 
the  States.2  These  assumptions  of  power  wrould  not  long, 
we  may  be  certain,  have  left  the  sole  authority  of  legislation 
in  the  king,  and  might,  perhaps,  be  censured  as  usurpation,  if 
the  peculiar  emergency  in  which  France  was  then  placed  did 
not  furnish  their  defence.  But,  if  it  be  true  that  the  kingdom 
was  reduced  to  the  utmost  danger  and  exhaustion,  as  much 
by  malversation  of  its  government  as  by  the  armies  of  Edward 
III.,  who  shall  deny  to  its  representatives  the  right  of  ultimate 
sovereignty,  and  of  suspending  at  least  the  royal  prerogatives, 
by  the  abuse  of  which  they  were  falling  into  destruction  ? 8 
I  confess  that  it  is  exceedingly  difficult,  or  perhaps  imprac- 
ticable, with  such  information  as  we  possess,  to  decide  upon 
the  motives  and  conduct  of  the  States- General  in  their  several 
meetings  before  and  after  the  battle  of  Poitiers.  Arbitrary 
power  prevailed ;  and  its  opponents  became,  of  course,  the 
theme  of  obloquy  with  modern  historians.  Froissart,  however, 
does  not  seem  to  impute  any  fault  to  these  famous  assemblies 

1  The    proceedings    of    States-General  any  limitations  in  respect  of  enacting 

held  under  Philip  IV.  and  his  sons  have  laws,  save  those  which,  until  the  reign 

left  no  trace  in  the  French  statute-book,  of  Philip  the  Fair,  the  feudal  principles 

Two    ordonnances    alone,   out  of  some  had  imposed. 

hundred    enacted   by  Philip  of  Valois,  2  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  iii.  p.    21 

appear  to  have  been  founded  upon  their  and  preface,  p.  42.    This  preface  by  M. 

suggestions.  Secouse,  the  editor,  gives  a  very  clear 

It  is  absolutely  certain  that  the  States-  view  of  the  general  and  provincial  assem- 

General  of  France  had  at  no  period,  and  blies  held  in  the  reign  of  John.     Bou- 

in  no  instance,  a   coordinate    legislative  lainvilliers.  Hist,  de  TAncien  Gouverne- 

authority  with  the  crown,  or  even  a  con-  ment  de  France,  t.  ii.,  or  Villaret,  t.  ix.. 

senting    voice.      Mably,    Boulaiuvilliers,  may  be  perused  with  advantage. 

and  Montlosier,  are  as  decisive  on  this  3  The  second  continuator  of  Nangis  in 

subject  as  the  most  courtly  writers  of  the  Spicilegium  dwells  on  the  heavy  taxes, 

that  country.     It  follows  as  a  just  con-  diminution  of  money,  and  general  opprea 

sequence  that  France  never  possessed  a  si  veness  of  government  in  this  age:  t.  iii 

free  constitution;  nor  had  the  monarchy  p.  108. 

VOL    ].  — M.  16 


22G 


STATES-GENERAL. 


Chap.  II.  Part  11 


of  (he  States-General ;  and  still  less  a  more  contemporary 
historian,  the  anonymous  continuator  of  Nangis.  Their 
notices,  however,  arc  vrery  slight;  and  our  chief  knowledge 
of  the  parliamentary  history  of  France,  if  I  may  employ  the 
expression,  must  be  collected  from  the  royal  ordinances  made 
upon  these  occasions,  or  from  unpublished  accounts  of  their 
transactions.  Some  of  these,  which  are  quoted  by  the  later 
historians,  are,  of  course,  inaccessible  to  a  writer  in  this 
country.  But  a  manuscript  in  the  British  Museum,  contain- 
ing the  early  proceedings  of  that  assembly  which  met  in 
October,  1356,  immediately  after  the  battle  of  Poitiers,  by  no 
means  leads  to  an  unfavorable  estimate  of  its  intentions.1  The 
tone  of  their  representations  to  the  duke  of  Normandy  (Charles 
V.,  not  then  called  Dauphin)  is  full  of  loyal  respect ;  their 
complaints  of  bad  administration,  though  bold  and  pointed,  not 
outrageous  ;  their  offers  of  subsidy  liberal.  The  necessity  of 
restoring  the  coin  is  strongly  represented  as  the  grand  con- 
dition upon  which  they  consented  to  tax  the  people,  who  had 
been  long  defrauded  by  the  base  money  of  Philip  the  Fair 
and  his  successors.2 


i  Cotton  MSS.  Titus,  t.  xii.  fol.  58-74. 
This  manuscript  is  noticed,  as  an  im- 
portant documeut,  in  the  preface  to  the 
third  volume  of  Ordonuances,  p.  48.  by 
M.  Secousse,  who  had  found  it  mentioned 
in  the  Bibliotheque  Historique  of  T,e 
Long,  No.  11,242.  No  French  antiquary 
appears,  at  least  before  that  time,  to  have 
seen  it;  but  Boulainvilliers  conjectured 
that  it  related  to  the  assembly  of  States 
in  February,  1356  (1357),  and  M.  Secousse 
supposed  it  rather  to  be  the  original 
journal  of  the  preceding  meeting  in  Oc- 
tober, 1356,  from  which  a  copy,  found 
among  the  manuscripts  of  Dupuy,  and 
frequently  referred  to  by  Secousse  him- 
self in  his  preface,  had  been  taken.  M. 
Secousse  was  perfectly  right  in  supposing 
the  manuscript  in  question  to  relate  to 
the  proceedings  of  October,  and  not  of 
February ;  but  it  is  not  an  original  instru- 
ment. It  forms  part  of  a  small  volume 
written  on  vellum,  and  containing  several 
other  treatises.  It  seems,  however,  as 
far  as  1  can  judge,  to  be  another  copy  of 
the  account  which  Dupuy  possessed,  and 
which  Secousse  so  often  quotes,  under 
the  name  of  Proces-verbal. 

It  is  singular  that  Sismondi  says  (x. 
479),  with  Secousse  before  his  eyes,  that 
the  proc&s-verbaux  of  the  States-General, 
in  1356,  are  not  extant. 

2  Ft  estoit  et  est  Tentente  de  ceulx  qui 
a  la  ditte  convocation  estoient,  que  gui'l- 


conque  ottroy  ou  ayde  qu'ils  feissent,  ila 
eussent  bonne  monnoye  et  establi 
l'advis  des  trois  estats ;  et  que  les  chartres 
et  lettres  faites  pour  les  reformations  du 
royaume  par  le  roy  Philippe  le  Bel,  et 
toutes  celles  qui  furent  faites  par  le  roy 
notre  seigneur  qui  est  a  present,  fussent 
confirmees,  enterinees,  tenues.  el  gar  I  es 
de  point  en  point;  et  toutes  les  aides 
quelconques  qui  faites  soient  fussent  re 
cues  et  distributes  par  ceulx  qui  soient  a 
ce  commis  par  les  trois  estats,  et  autori- 
sees  par  M.  le  Due,  et  sur  certaines  au- 
tres  conditions  et  modifications  justes  et 
raissonables  prouffltables,  et  semble  que 
ceste  aide  eust  tite  moult  grant  et  moult 
pi-ouffitable,  et  trop  plus  que  aides  de 
fait  de  monnoye.  Car  elle  se  feroit  de 
volonte  du  peuple  et  consentement  com- 
mun  selon  Dieu  et  selon  conscience:  El 
le  proufnt  que  on  prent  et  veult  on  pien- 
dre  sur  le  fait  de  la  monnoye  duquel  on 
veult  faire  le  fait  de  la  guerre,  et  ce  soil 
a  la  destruction,  et  a  esfee  an  temps 
passe,  du  roy  et  du  royaume  et  des  BUD 
jets  ;  Et  si  se  destruit  le  billon  bant  par 
fontures  et  blanchis  comme  autrement, 
ne  le  fait  ne  peust  durer  longuenient 
qu'il  ne  vienne  a  destruction  si  on  con- 
tioue  longuement;  Et  si  est  tout  certain 
que  les  gens  d'armes  ne  vouldroient 
estre  contens  de  leurs  gaiges  par  foibU 
monnoye,  &c. 


Fkudal  System.  TROUBLES  AT  PARIS.  227 

But  whatever  opportunity  might  now  be  afforded  for  estat> 
lishing  a  just  and  tree  constitution  in  France  was  ™     Ki 

•      ii  /~ii       i  •  1  -,  Troubles  at 

entirely  lost.  Charles,  inexperienced  and  sur-  Paris, 
rounded  by  evil  counsellors,  thought  the  States-  AD' 1357, 
General  inclined  to  encroach  upon  his  rights,  of  which,  in  the 
best  part  of  his  life,  he  was  always  abundantly  careful.  He 
dismissed,  therefore,  the  assembly,  and  had  recourse  to  the 
easy  but  ruinous  expedient  of  debasing  the  coin.  This  led  to 
seditions  at  Paris,  by  which  his  authority,  and  even  his  life, 
were  endangered.  In  February,  1357,  three  months  after 
the  last  meeting  had  been  dissolved,  he  was  obliged  to  con- 
voke the  States  again,  and  to  enact  an  ordinance  conformable 
to  the  petitions  tendered  by  the  former  assembly.1  This  con- 
tained many  excellent  provisions,  both  for  the  redress  of  abuses 
and  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war  against  Edward  ; 
and  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  that  men  who  advised  measures 
so  conducive  to  the  public  weal  could  have  been  the  blind  in- 
struments of  the  king  of  Navarre.  But  this,  as  I  have 
already  observed,  is  a  problem  in  history  that  we  cannot  hope 
to  resolve.  It  appears,  however,  that,  in  a  few  weeks  after 
the  promulgation  of  this  ordinance,  the  proceedings  of  the  re- 
formers fell  into  discredit,  and  their  commission  of  thirty-six, 
to  whom  the  collection  of  the  new  subsidy,  the  redress  of 
grievances,  and,  in  fact,  the  whole  administration  of  govern- 
ment had  been  intrusted,  became  unpopular.  The  subsidy 
produced  much  less  than  they  had  led  the  people  to  expect : 
briefly,  the  usual  consequence  of  democratical  emotions  in  a 
monarchy  took  place.  Disappointed  by  the  failure  of  hopes 
unreasonably  entertained  and  improvidently  encouraged,  and 
disgusted  by  the  excesses  of  the  violent  demagogues,  the  na- 
tion, especially  its  privileged  classes,  who  seem  to  have  con- 
curred in  the  original  proceedings  of  the  States-General, 
attached  themselves  to  the  party  of  Charles,  and  enabled  him 
to  quell  opposition  by  force.2  Marcel,  provost  of  the  traders, 
a  municipal  magistrate  of  Paris,  detected  in  the  overt  execu- 
tion of  a  traitorous  conspiracy  with  the  king  of  Navarre,  was 
put  to  death  by  a  private  hand.  Whatever  there  had  been 
of  real  patriotism  in  the  States-General,  artfully  confounded, 
according  to  the  practice  of  courts,  with  these  schemes  of 

l  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  iii.  p.  121.      enim  regni   negotia  male  ire,  &c.    Coo 
*  Discordia   niotu,   illi   tres   status   ab    tinuator  Gul.  de  Nangis  in  Spicilegio,  t 
Incepto  proposito  cessaverunt      Ex  tuuc    iii.  p.  115. 


228  ARBITRARY   TAXATION,       Chap.  II.  Part  \L 

disaffected  men,  shared  in  the  common  obloquy ;  whatever 
substantial  reforms  had  been  projected  the  government  threw 
aside  as  seditious  innovation-.  Charles,  who  had  assumed 
the  title  of  regent,  found  in  the  States-General  assembled  at 
Paris,  in  1359,  a  very  different  disposition  from  that  which 
their  predecessors  had  displayed,  and  publicly  restored  all 
counsellors  whom  in  the  former  troubles  he  had  been  com- 
pelled to  discard.  Thus  the  monarchy  resettled  itself  on  its 
ancient  basis,  or,  more  properly,  acquired  additional  stability.1 
Both  John,  after  the  peace  of  Bretigni,  and  Charles 
V.  imposed  taxes  without  consent  of  the  States- 
imposed  by  General.*2  The  latter,  indeed,  hardly  ever  con- 
ChariefTv  voked  that  assembly.  Upon  his  death  the  conten- 
tion between  the  crown  and  representative  body 
orXnance  of  was  renewed ;  and,  in  the  first  meeting  held  after 
CharrqKfL  tne  aeces8i°n  °f  Charles  VI.,  the  government  was 
compelled  to  revoke  all  taxes  illegally  imposed 
since  the  reign  of  Philip  IV.  This  is  the  most  remedial  or 
dinance,  perhaps,  in  the  history  of  French  legislation.  "  We 
will,  ordain  and  grant,"  says  the  king,  "  that  the  aids,  subsi- 
dies, and  impositions,  of  whatever  kind,  and  however  imposed, 
that  have  had  course  in  the  realm  since  the  reign  of  our 
predecessor,  Philip  the  Fair,  shall  be  repealed  and  abolished; 
and  we  will  and  decree  that,  by  the  course  which  the  said  im- 
positions have  had,  we  or  our  successors  shall  not  have  ac- 
quired any  right,  nor  shall  any  prejudice  be  wrought  to 
our  people,  nor  to  their  privileges  and  liberties,  which  shall 
be  reestablished  in  as  full  a  manner  as  they  enjoyed  them  in 
the  reign  of  Philip  the  Fair,  or  at  any  time  since ;  and  Ave 
will  and  decree  that,  if  anything  has  been  done  contrary  to 
them  since  that  time  to  the  present  hour,  neither  we  nor  our 
successors  shall  take  any  advantage  therefrom."3  If  circum- 
stances had  turned  out  favorably  for  the.  cause  of  liberty,  this 
ordinance  might  have  been  the  basis  of  a  free  constitution, 
in  respect,  at  least,  of  immunity  from  arbitrary  taxation  But 
the  coercive  measures  of  the  court  and  tumultuous  spirit  of 

1  A  very  full  account  of  these  trans-  lainvilliers  and  Mably,  whom,  however, 

actions  is  given  by  Secousse,  in  his  His-  it  is  well  worth  while  to  hear, 
tory  of  Charles  the  Bad,  p.  107,  and  in        -  Mably,  1.  v.  c.  5,  note  5. 
his  preface  to  the   third  volume  of  the        3  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  vi.  p.  564. 

Ordonnances  des  Rois.     The  reader  must  The   ordinance   is  long,  containing  fVe 

make  allowance  for  the  usual  partialities  quent  repetitions,   and   a  great   redua 

of  a  French  historian,  where  an  opposi-  dance  of  words,  intended   to  give  moid 

tion  to  the  reigning  prince  is  his  subject,  force,  or  at  least  solemnity. 
A  contrary  bias   is   manifested   by  Bou- 


Feudal  System.     AND   REMEDIAL   ORDINANCE.  229 

the  Parisians  produced  an  open  quarrel,  in  which  the  pop 
ular  party  met  with  a  decisive  failure. 

It  seems,  indeed,  impossible  that  a  number  of  deputies, 
elected  merely  for  the  purpose  of  granting  money,  can  pos- 
sess that  weight,  or  be  invested  in  the  eyes  of  their  constitu- 
ents with  that  awfulness  of  station,  which  is  required  to 
withstand  the  royal  authority.  The  States-General  had  no 
right  of  redressing  abuses,  except  by  petition  ;  no  share  in 
the  exercise  of  sovereignty,  which  is  inseparable  from  the 
legislative  power.  Hence,  even  in  their  proper  department 
of  imposing  taxes,  they  were  supposed  incapable  of  binding 
their  constituents  without  their  special  assent.  Whether  it 
were  the  timidity  of  the  deputies,  or  false  notions  of  freedom, 
which  produced  this  doctrine,  it  was  evidently  repugnant  to 
the  stability  and  dignity  of  a  representative  assembly.  Nor 
was  it  less  ruinous  in  practice  than  mistaken  in  theory.  For 
as  the  necessary  subsidies,  after  being  provisionally  granted 
by  the  States,  were  often  rejected  by  their  electors,  the  king 
found  a  reasonable  pretence  for  dispensing  with  the  concur- 
rence of  his  subjects  when  he  levied  contributions  upon 
them. 

The    States-General    were   convoked    but    rarely    under 
Charles  VI.  and  VII.,  both  of  whom  levied  money  gtateg_ 
without  their  concurrence.     Yet  there  are  remark-  General 
able  testimonies  under  the  latter  of  these  princes  g^yn. 
that   the   sanction  of  national  representatives  was 
still  esteemed  strictly  requisite  to  any  ordinance  imposing  a 
general  tax,  however  the  emergency  of  circumstances  might 
excuse  a  more  arbitrary  procedure.     Thus  Charles  VII.,  in 
1436,  declares  that  he  has  set  up  again  the  aids  which  had 
been  previously  abolished  by  the  consent  of  the  three  estates.1 
And  in  the  important  edict  establishing  the  companies  of  or- 
donnance,   which  is   recited  to  be  done  by  the  advice  and 
counsel  of  the  States-General  assembled  at  Orleans,  the  for- 
ty first  section  appears  to  bear  a  necessary  construction  that 
no  tallage  could  lawfully  be  imposed  without  such  consent.8 
It  is  maintained,  indeed,  by  some  writers,  that  the  perpetual 
taille  established  about  the  same  time  was  actually  granted  by 
these  States  of  1430,  though  it  does  not  so  appear  upon  the 

1  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  xiii.  p.  211.     granted  money  during  this  reign  :  t.  iil 

2  Ibid  ,  p.  312.     Boulainvilliers  men-     p.  70 
tions  other  instances    where  the   States 


230  PKOWNCIAL   ESTATES.       Chap.  II.  Part  li 

face  of  any  ordinance.1    And  certainly  this  is  consonant  to  the 
real  and  recognized  constitution  of  that  age. 

But  the  crafty  advisers  of  courts  in  the  fifteenth  century, 
Provincial  enlightened  by  experience  of  past  dangers,  were 
estates.  averse  to  encountering  these  great  political  masses, 

from  which  there  were,  even  in  peaceful  times,  some  disquiet- 
ing interferences,  some  testimonies  of  public  spirit,  and  rec- 
ollections of  liberty  to  apprehend.  The  kings  of  France, 
indeed,  had  a  resource,  which  generally  enabled  them  to  avoid 
a  convocation  of  the  States-General,  without  violating  the 
national  franchises.  From  provincial  assemblies,  composed 
of  the  three  orders,  they  usually  obtained  more  money  than 
they  could  have  extracted  from  the  common  representatives 
of  the  nation,  and  heard  less  of  remonstrance  and  demand.2 
Languedoc  in  particular  had  her  own  assembly  of  states,  and 
was  rarely  called  upon  to  send  deputies  to  the  general  body, 
or  representatives  of  what  was  called  the  Languedoil.  But 
Auvergne,  Normandy,  and  other  provinces  belonging  to  the 
latter  division,  had  frequent  convocations  of  their  respective 
estates  during  the  intervals  of  the  States-General  —  intervals 
which  by  this  means  were  protracted  far  beyond  that  dura- 
tion to  which  the  exigencies  of  the  crown  would  otherwise 
have  confined  them.3  This  was  one  of  the  essential  differ- 
ences between  the  constitutions  of  France  and  England,  and 
arose  out  of  the  original  disease  of  the  former  monarchy  — 
the  distraction  and  want  of  unity  consequent  upon  the  de- 
cline of  Charlemagne's  family,  wdiich  separated  the  different 
provinces,  in  respect  of  their  interests  and  domestic  govern- 
ment, from  each  other. 

But  the  formality  of  consent,  whether  by  general  or  pro- 
vincial states,  now  ceased  to  be  reckoned  indispensable.  The 
lawyers  had  rarely  seconded  any  efforts  to  restrain  arbitrary 
power  :  in  their  hatred  of  feudal  principles,  especially  those 
of  territorial  jurisdiction,  every  generous  sentiment  of  free- 
dom was  proscribed;  or,  if  they  admitted  that  absolute  pre- 
rogative might  require  some  checks,  it  was  such  only  as 
themselves,  not  the  national  representatives,  should  impose. 
Taxes  of  Charles  VII.  levied  money  by  his  own  authority. 
Louis  xi.       Louis  XI.  carried  this  encroachment  to  the  highest 

1    Brequigny,     preface    ax.    treizieme        2  Villaret,  t.  xi.  p.  270. 
tome  des  Ordonnances.     Boulainvilliers,        *  Ordonnances  des  Kois,  t.  iii.  pre  fao* 
t.  iii.  p.  108. 


Feudal  System.    STAT1.S-GENERAL  OF  TOURS.  231 

pitch  of  exaction.  It  was  the  boast  of  courtiers  that  he  firsV 
released  the  kings  of  France  from  dependence  (Jiors  de  page)  ; 
or,  in  other  words,  that  he  effectually  demolished  those  bar- 
riers which,  however  imperfect  and  ill-placed,  had  imposed 
some  impediment  to  the  establishment  of  despotism.1 

The  exactions  of  Louis,  however,  though  borne  with 
patience,  did  not  pass  for  legal  with  those  upon  whom  they 
pressed.  Men  still  remembered  their  ancient  privileges, 
which  they  might  see  with  mortification  well  preserved  in 
England.  "  There  is  no  monarch  or  lord  upon  earth  (says 
Philip  de  Comines,  himself  bred  in  courts)  who  can  raise  a 
farthing  upon  his  subjects,  beyond  his  own  domains,  without 
their  free  concession,  except  through  tyranny  and  violence. 
It  may  be  objected  that  in  some  cases  there  may  not  be  time 
to  assemble  them,  and  that  war  will  bear  no  delay ;  but  I  re- 
ply (he  proceeds)  that  such  haste  ought  not  to  be  made,  and 
there  will  be  time  enough ;  and  I  tell  you  that  princes  are 
more  powerful,  and  more  dreaded  by  their  enemies,  when 
they  undertake  anything  with  the  consent  of  their  subjects."  2 

The   States-General    met    but   twice   during  the  reijm  of 
Louis  XL,  and  on  neither  occasion  for  the  purpose  a 
of  granting  money.     But  an  assembly  in  the  first  General  oi 
year  of    Charles   VIII.,  the   States  of  Tours   injjg£8in 
1484,  is  too  important  to  be  overlooked,  as  it  marks 
the  last  struggle  of  the  French  nation  by  its  legal  representa 
tives  for  immunity  from  arbitrary  taxation. 

A  warm  contention  arose  for  the  regency  upon  the  acces- 
sion of  Charles  VIIL,  between  his  aunt,  Anne  de  Beaujeu, 
whom  the  late  king  had  appointed  by  testament,  and  the 
princes  of  the  blood,  at  the  head  of  whom  stood  the  duke  of 
Orleans,  afterwards  Louis  XII.  The  latter  combined  to  de- 
mand a  convocation  of  the  States- General,  which  accordingly 
took  place.  The  king's  minority  and  th°,  factions  at  court 
seemed  no  unfavorable  omens  for  liberty.  But  a  scheme  was 
artfully  contrived  which  had   the   most   direct   tendency  to 

1  The  preface  to  the  sixteenth  volume  de  Comines  was  forcibly  struck  with  the 

of  Ordonnances,  before  quoted,  displays  different  situation  of  England  and   the 

a  lamentable  picture  of  the  internal  sit-  Netherlands.     And  Sir  John   Fortescue 

uation  of  France  in  consequence  of  ex-  has  a  remarkable  passage  on  the  poverty 

cessive  taxation  and  other  abuses.  These  and  servitude  of  the  French  commons, 

evils,  in  a  less  aggravated  degree,  con-  contrasted   with  English  freemen. —  Dif 

tinued  ever  since  to  retard  the  improve-  ference  of  Limited  and  Absolute  Moa 

ment  and  diminish  the   intrinsic  pros-  archy,  p.  17. 

perity  of  a  country  so   extraordinarily  2  Mem   de  Comines,  1.  iv.  c.  19. 
endowed  with  natural  advantages.  Philip 


232  STATES-GENERAL   OF  TOURS.    Chap.  II.  Part  II 

break  tne  force  of  a  popular  assembly.     The  deputies  were 
classed  in  six  nations,  who  debated  in  separate  chambers,  and 
consulted  each  other  only  upon  the  result  of  their  respective 
deliberations.     It  was  easy  for  the  court  to  foment  the  jeal- 
ousies natural  to  such  a  partition.     Two  nations,  the  Norman 
and  Burgundian,  asserted  that  the  right  of  providing  for  the 
regency  devolved,  in  the  king's  minority,  upon   the  Stafo   - 
General ;  a  claim  of  great  boldness,  and  certainly  not  much 
founded  upon  precedents.     In  virtue  of  this,  they  proposed  to 
form  a  council,  not  only  of  the  princes,  but  of  certain  depu- 
ties to  be  elected  by  the  six  nations  wrho  composed  the  States. 
But  the  other  four,  those  of  Paris,  Aquitaine,  Languedoc,  and 
Languedoil  (which  last  comprised  the  central  provinces),  re- 
jected this  plan,  from   which  the  two  former  ultimately  de- 
sisted, and  the  choice  of  councillors  was  left  to  the  princes. 
A  firmer  and  more  unanimous  spirit  was  displayed  upon 
the  subject   of  public  reformation.     The   tyranny  of   Louis 
XI.  had  been  so  unbounded,  that  all  ranks  agreed  in  calling 
for  redress,  and  the  new  governors  were  desirous,  at  least  by 
punishing  his  favorites,  to   show  their  inclination  towards  a 
change  of  system.     They  were  very  far,  however,  from  ap- 
proving the  propositions  of  the  States-General.     These  went 
to  points  which  no  court  can  bear  to  feel  touched,  though 
there  is  seldom  any  other  mode  of  redressing  public  abuses : 
the  profuse  expense  of  the  royal  household,  the  number  of 
pensions  and  improvident  grants,  the  excessive  establishment 
of  troops.     The  States  explicitly  demanded  that  the  taille  and 
all   other   arbitrary  imposts   should  be   abolished ;   and   that 
from    thenceforward,    "  according  to    the    natural  liberty  of 
France,"  no  tax  should  be  levied  in  the  kingdom  without  the 
consent   of   the    States.     It  was   with    great    difficulty,  and 
through  the  skilful  management  of  the  court,  that  they  con- 
sented to  the  collection  of  the  taxes  payable  in  the  time  of 
Charles  VII.,  with  the  addition  of  one  fourth  as  a  gift  to  the 
king   upon   his  accession.     This  subsidy  they  declare  to  be 
granted  "  by  way  of  gift  and  concession,  and  not  otherwise, 
and  so  as  no  one  should  from  thenceforward  call  it  a  tax,  but 
a  gift  and  concession."     And  this  was  only  to  be  in  force  for 
two  years,  after  which  they  stipulated   that  another  meeting 
should  be  convoked.     But  it  was  little  likely  that  the  govern- 
ment would  encounter  such  a  risk ;  and  the   prince-,  whose 
factious  views  the  States  had  by  no  means  seconded,  felt  nc 


Feudal  System.      SCHEME  OF  JURISDICTION.  23b 

temptation  to  urge  again  their  convocation.  No  assembly  in 
the  annals  of  France  seems,  notwithstanding  some  party 
selfishness  arising  out  of  the  division  into  nations,  to  have 
conducted  itself  with  so  much  public  spirit  and  moderation ; 
nor  had  that  country  perhaps  ever  so  fair  a  prospect  of  estab- 
lishing a  legitimate  constitution.1 

5.  The   right   of  jurisdiction    has   undergone    changes   in 
France  and   in   the   adjacent   countries  still  more  Succesgive 
remarkable  than   those  of  the  legislative  power ;  changes  in 
and  passed  through  three  very  distinct  stages,  as  ^{y^f ,al 
the    popular,  aristocratic,   or  regal   influence  pre-  France, 
dominated  in  the  political  system.     The  Franks,  original 
Lombards,  and  Saxons  seem  alike  to  have  been  ?chem.e°f 

.      ,  „.,..,  t        .  ,  jurisdiction 

jealous  or  judicial  authority,  and  averse  to  surren- 
dering what  concerned  every  man's  private  right  out  of  the 
hands  of  his  neighbors  and  his  equals.  Every  ten  families 
are  supposed  to  have  had  a  magistrate  of  their  own  election : 
the  tithingman  of  England,  the  decanus  of  France  and  Lom- 
bardy.2  Next  in  order  was  the  Centenarius  or  Hundredary, 
whose  name  expresses  the  extent  of  his  jurisdiction,  and  who, 
like  the  Decanus,  was  chosen  by  those  subject  to  it.3  But  the 
authority  of  these  petty  magistrates  was  gradually  confmed 
to  the  less  important  subjects  of  legal  inquiry.  No  man,  by 
a  capitulary  of  Charlemagne,  could  be  impleaded  for  his  life, 
or  liberty,  or  lands,  or  servants,  in  the  hundred  court.4  In 
such  weighty  matters,  or  by  way  of  appeal  from  the  lower 
jurisdictions,  the  count  of  the  district  was  judge.  He  indeed 
was  appointed  by  the  sovereign ;  but  his  power  was .  checked 
by  assessors,  called  Scabini,  who  held  their  office  by  the 
election,  or  at  least  the  concurrence,  of  the  people.5     An  ulti- 

1 1  am  altogether  indebted  to  Gamier  Decanus ;    and    Muratori,   Antiq.    Ttal. 

for  the  proceedings  of  the  States  of  Tours.  Dissert.^  10. 

His  account  (Hist,  de  France,  t.  xviii.  p.  3  It  is  evident  from  the  Capitularies  ci 

154-348)  is   extremely   copious,  and   de-  Charlemagne   (Baluze,  t.  i.  p.  426,  466) 

rived  from  a  manuscript   journal.    Co-  that  the  Centeuarii  were  elected  by  the 

mines  alludes  to  them  sometimes,  but  people  ;    that  is,   I   suppose,    the    free- 

with    little   particularity.      The   above  holders. 

mentioned  manuscript  was  published  in  *  Ut  nullus  homo  in  placito  centenarii 

1835,  among  the  Documens  Inedits  sur  neque  ad  mortem,  ne  jue  ad  libertatem 

1'Histoire  de  France.  suam  amittendam,  aut  ad  res  reddendas 

2  The    Decanus    is    mentioned    by   a  vel  mancipia  judicetur.     Sed  ista  aut  iu 

writer  of  the    ninth  age   as   the  lowest  presentia  comitis   vel   missorum   nostro- 

specied  of  judge,  immediately  under  the  rum  judicentur.     Capit.  A.D.  812;  Baluz 

Centenarius.     The  latter  is  compared  to  p.  497. 

the  Plebanus,  or  priest,  of  a  church  where  »  Baluzii  Capitularia,    p.   466;    Mura 

baptism  was  performed,  and  the  former  tori,  Dissert.   10;  Du  Can^e,  v.  Scabini 

to  an  inferior  presbyter      Du  Cange,  v.  These  Scabini  may  be  traced  by  the  light 


234 


TERRITORIAL  JURISDICTION.    Chap.  II.  Tart  II 


mate  appeal  seems  to  have  lain  to  the  Count  Palatine,  an 
officer  of  the  royal  household ;  and  sometimes  causes  were 
decided  by  the  sovereign  himself.1  Such  was  the  original 
model  of  judicature  ;  but  as  complaints  of  injustice  and  neg- 
lect were  frequently  made  against  the  counts,  Charlemagne, 
desirous  on  every  account  to  control  them,  appointed  special 
judges,  called  Missi  Regii,  who  held  assises  from  place  to 
place,  inquired  into  abuses  and  maladministration  of  justice, 
enforced  its  execution,  and  expelled  inferior  judges  from  their 
offices  for  misconduct.2 

This  judicial  system  was  gradually  superseded  by  one 
Territorial  founded  upon  totally  opposite  principles,  those  of 
jurisdiction.  feudal  privilege.  It  is  difficult  to  ascertain  the 
progress  of  territorial  jurisdiction.  In  many  early  charters 
of  the  French  kings,  beginning  with  one  of  Dagobert  I.  in 
630,  we  find  inserted  in  their  grants  of  land  an  immunity 
from  the  entrance  of  the  ordinary  judges,  either  to  hear 
causes,  or  to  exact  certain  dues  accruing  to  the  king  and  to 
themselves.3  These  charters  indeed  relate  to  church  lands, 
which,  as  it  seems  implied  by  a  law  of  Charlemagne,  univer- 


of  charters  down  to  the  eleventh  century. 
Recueil  des  Historiens,  t.  vi.  preface,  p. 
186.  There  is.  in  particular,  a  decisive 
proof  of  their  existence  in  918,  in  a  record 
which  T  have  already  had  occasion  to 
quote.  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t. 
ii.  Appendix,  p.  56.  Du  Cange,  Baluze, 
and  other  antiquaries  have  confounded 
the  Scabini  with  the  Rachimburgii.  of 
whom  we  read  in  the  oldest  laws.  Rut 
Savignv  and  Guizot  have  proved  the  lat- 
ter were  landowners,  acting  in  the  coun- 
ty courts  as  judges  under  the  presidency 
of  the  count,  but  wholly  independent  of 
him.  The  Scabini  in  Charlemagne's  age 
superseded  them.  — Essais  sur  THistoire 
le  Frauce,  p.  259,  272. 

1  Du  Cange.  Dissertation  14.  sur  Join- 
ville;  and  Glossary,  v.  Comites  Palatini; 
Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  [nscripfc.  t.  xxx.  p. 
690.  Louis  the  Debonair  gave  one  day 
In  every  week  for  hearing  causes  ;  but 
his  subjects  were  required  not  to  have 
recourse  to  him,  unless  where  the  Missi 
or  the  counts  had  not  done  justice.  Ba- 
luze, t.  i.  p.  668.  Charles  the  Bald  ex 
pressly  reserves  an  appeal  to  himself 
from  the  inferior  tribunals.  Capit.  869, 
t.  ii.  p.  215.  In  his  reign  there  was  at 
least  a  claim  u.  sovereign!-;,  preserved. 

2  For  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Missi 
Regii, besides  the  Capitularies  themselves, 
«se  Muratori's  eighth  Dissertation.     They 


went  their  circuits  four  times  a-year. 
Capitul.  a.d.  812;  a.d.  823.  A  vestige 
of  this  institution  lonsr  continued  in  the 
province  of  Auvergne,  under  the  name 
of  Grands  Jours  d'Auvergne ;  which 
Louis  XI.  revived  in  1479.  Girnier, 
Hist,  de  France,  t.  xviii.  p.  458. 

3  If  a  charter  of  Clovis  to  a  monastery 
called  Reomaense,  dated  496,  is  genuine, 
the  same  words  of  exemption  occurring 
in  it,  we  must  refer  territorial  jurisdic- 
tion to  the  very  infancy  of  the  French 
monarchy.  And  M.  Lehuerou  (Tnst 
Caroling,  p.  225  et  post)  has  strongly 
contended  for  the  right  of  lords  to  exer- 
cise jurisdiction  in  virtue  of  their  owner- 
ship of  the  soil,  and  without  regard  to 
the  personal  Ian;  of  those  coming  within 
its  scope  by  residence.  This  territorial 
right  he  deduces  from  the  earliest  times ; 
it  was  an  enlargement  of  the  ancient 
mundium,  or  protection,  amoug  the  Ger- 
mans ;  which  must  have  been  solely  per- 
sonal before  the  establishment  of  sepa- 
rate property  in  laud,  but  became  local 
after  the  settlement  iu  Gaul,  to  which 
that  great  civil  revolution  was  due.  The 
authority  of  M.  Lehuerou  is  entitled  to 
much  respect ;  yet  his  theory  seems  to 
involve  a  more  extensive  development  of 
the  feudal  system  in  the  Merovingian 
period  than  we  generally  admit. 


Feudal  System.      TERRITORIAL  JURISDICTION.  235 

sally  possessed  an  exemption  from  ordinary  jurisdiction.  ^  A 
precedent,  however,  in  Marculfus  leads  us  to  infer  a  similar 
immunity  to  have  been  usual  in  gifts  to  private  persons.1 
These  rights  of  justice  in  the  beneficiary  tenants  of  the  crown 
are  attested  in  several  passages  of  the  capitularies.  And  a 
charter  of  Louis  I.  to  a  private  individual  contains  a  full  and 
exclusive  concession  of  jurisdiction  over  all  persons  resident 
within  the  territory,  though  subject  to  the  appellant  control 
of  the  royal  tribunals.2  It  is  obvious,  indeed,  that  an  ex- 
emption from  the  regular  judicial  authorities  implied  or  natu- 
rally led  to  a  right  of  administering  justice  in  their  place. 
But  this  could  at  first  hardly  extend  beyond  the  tributaries  or 
villeins  who  cultivated  their  master's  soil,  or,  at  most,  to  free 
persons  without  property,  resident  in  the  territory.  To  de- 
termine their  quarrels,  or  chastise  their  offences,  was  no  very 
illustrious  privilege.  An  alodial  freeholder  could  own  no 
jurisdiction  but  that  of  the  king.  It  was  the  general  preva- 
lence of  subinfeudation  which  gave  importance  to  the  terri 
torial  jurisdictions  of  the  nobility.  For  now  the  military 
tenants,  instead  of  repairing  to  the  county-court,  sought  jus- 
tice in  that  of  their  immediate  lord ;  or  rather  the  count  him- 
self, become  the  suzerain  instead  of  the  governor  of  his  dis- 
trict, altered  the  form  of  his  tribunal  upon  the  feudal  model.8 
A  system  of  procedure  so  congenial  to  the  spirit  of  the  age 
spread  universally  over  France  and  Germany.  The  tri- 
bunals of  the  king  were  forgotten  like  his  laws ;  the  one 
retaining  as  little  authority  to  correct,  as  the  other  to  regu- 
late, the  decisions  of  a  territorial  judge.  The  rules  of  evi- 
dence were  superseded  by  that  monstrous  birth  of  ferocity 
and  superstition,  the  judicial  combat,  and  the  maxims  of  law 
reduced  to  a  few  capricious  customs,  which  varied  in  almost 
every  barony. 

i  Marculfl  Formulae,  1.  i.  c.  17.  well  as  royal  tribunals.    Si  aliquis  epi*- 

2  Et   nullus  comes,  nee  vicarius,  nee  copus,  Tel  comes  ac  vassus  noster  suo 

juniores  eorum,  nee  illus  judex  publi-  hoinini  contra  rectum  et  justitiam  fece- 

cus  illorum.  homines  qui  super  illorum  rit,  et  si  inde  ad  nos  reclamavent,  scial 

aprisione  habitant,  aut  in  illorum  pro-  quia,  sic  ut  ratio  et  lex  est,  hoc  emendawi 

prio,  distringere  nee  judicare  prnesumant ;  faciemus. 

sed  Johannes  et  filii  sui,  et  posteritas  il-  »  We  may  perhaps  infer,  from  a  capitu- 

lorum,  illi  eos  judicent  et   distringant.  Jary   of  Charlemagne  in  509,   that   the 

Et  quicquid  per  legem  judicaverint,  sta-  feudal  tenants  were  already  employed  as 

bilis  permaneat.     Et  si  extra  legem  fece-  assessors  in  the  administration  of  justice, 

rint,  per  legem  emendent.     Baluzii  Ca-  concurrently  with  the  Scabim  mentioned 

pitularia,  t.  ii.  p.  1405.  above.     Ut   nullus  ad    placitum   vemrn 

This   appellant  control  was  preserved  cogatur,  nisi  qui  causam   habet  ad  quae- 

by  the  capitulary  of  Charles  the  Bald,  ren  lmn.    exceptfe    scabinis    et   vassaUii 

quoted  already,   over   the   territorial  ;is  comituni.  Baluzii  Capitulana,  t.  i.  p.  v» 


3 


236  TERRITORIAL    ADMINISTRATION.     Chat.  II    Part.  II 

These  rights  of  administering  justice  were  possessed  by  th* 
owners  of  fiefs  in  very  different  degrees;  and,  in 
ite  divisions.  Franc6j  were  divided  into  the  high,  the  middle, 
and  the  low  jurisdiction.1  The  first  species  alone  (la  haute 
justice)  conveyed  the  [tower  of  life  and  death  ;  it  was  inherent 
in  the  baron  and  the  chatelain,  and  sometimes  enjoyed  by  the 
simple  vavassor.  The  lower  jurisdictions  were  not  competent 
to  judge  in  capital  cases,  and  consequent!}'  forced  to  send  such 
criminals  to  the  court  of  the  superior.  But  in  some  places,  a 
thief  taken  in  the  fact  might  be  punished  with  death  by  a 
lord  who  had  only  the  low  jurisdiction.  In  England  this  priv- 
ilege was  known  by  the  uncouth  terms  of  Infangthef  and 
Outfangthef.  The  high  jurisdiction,  however,  was  not  very 
common  in  this  country,  except  in  the  chartered  towns.2 

Several  customs  rendered  these  rights  of  jurisdiction  far 
its  admin-  less  instrumental  to  tyranny  than  we  might  infer 
istration.  from  their  extent.  While  the  counts  were  yet 
officers  of  the  crown,  they  frequently  appointed  a  deputy,  or 
viscount,  to  administer  justice.  Ecclesiastical  lords,  who  were 
prohibited  by  the  canons  from  inflicting  capital  punishment, 
and  supposed  to  be  unacquainted  with  the  law  followed  in 
civil  courts,  or  unable  to  enforce  it,  had  an  officer  by  name 
of  advocate,  or  vidame,  whose  tenure  was  often  feudal  and 
hereditary.  The  viguiers  (vicarii),  bailiffs,  provosts,  and 
seneschals  of  lay  lords  were  similar  ministers,  though  not  in 
general  of  so  permanent  a  right  in  their  offices,  or  of  such 
eminent  station,  as  the  advocates  of  monasteries.  It  seems 
to  have  been  an  established  maxim,  at  least  in  later  times, 
that  the  lord  could  not  sit  personally  in  judgment,  but  must 
intrust  that  function  to  his  bailiff  and  vassals.3     According  to 

i  Velly,  t.  vi.  p.  131 ;  Denisart,  Hou-  It  is  remarkable  that  the  Neapolitan 

nrd,  and  other  law-books.  barons  had  no  criminal  jurisdiction,  at 

2  A  strangely  cruel  privilege  was  pos-  least  of  the  higher  kind,  till  the  reign 
ceased  in  Aragon  by  the  lords  who  had  of  Alfonso,  in  1443,  who  sold  this  de- 
aot  the  higher  jurisdiction,  and  conse-  structive  privilege,  at  a  time  r.hen  it 
quently  could  not  publicly  execute  a  was  almost  abolished  in  other  king- 
criminal  :  that  of  starving  him  to  death  doms.  Giannone,  1.  xxii.  c.  5,  and  1 
In  prison.     This  was  established  by  law  xxvi.  c.  6. 

in   1247.     Si   vassallus   domini   non   ha-  3  Boutillier,    in    his    Somme    Rurale, 

bentifi  merurfl  nee  mixtum  imperium,  in  written  near  the  end  of  the  fourteenth 

loco  occideret  vassallum,  dominus    loci  century,  asserts  this  positively.     II  con- 

potest  eum  occidere  fame,  frigore  et  siti.  vicnt  quflz  facent  jugier  par  aultre  que 

Et  quilibet  dominus  loci  habet  banc  ju-  par  eulx.  cest  a  savoir  par  lours  hoinmes 

risdictionum  necandi  fame,  frigore  et  siti  feudaulx  a  leursemonce  etconjine  [?]  on 

in  suo  loco,  licet  nullam  aliam  jurisdic-  do  leur  bailiff  on  lieutenant,  et  out  re* 

tionem  criminalem  habeat.     I)u  Cahge,  sort  a  leur  souveraiu.     Fol.  8 
voc.  Fnmo  necare. 


Feudal  System.  TRIAL  BY  COMBAT.  237 

the  feudal  rules,  the  lord's  vassals  or  peers  of  his  court  wea-e 
to  assist  at  all  its  proceedings.  "  There  are  some  places," 
sa)  s  Beaumanoir,  "  where  the  bailiff  decides  in  judgment, 
and  others  where  the  vassals  of  the  lord  decide.  But  even 
where  the  bailiff  is  the  judge,  he  ought  to  advise  with  the 
most  prudent,  and  determine  by  their  advice ;  since  thus 
he  shall  be  most  secure  if  an  appeal  is  made  from  his  judg- 
ment." 1  And  indeed  the  presence  of  these  assessors  was 
so  essential  to  all  territorial  j  urisdiction,  that  no  lord,  to  what- 
ever rights  of  justice  his  fief  might  entitle  him,  was  qualified 
to  exercise  them,  unless  he  had  at  least  two  vassals  to  sit  as 
peers  in  his  court.2 

These  courts  of  a  feudal  barony  or  manor  required  neither 
the  knowledge  of  positive  law  nor  the  dictates  of  Trial  by 
natural  sagacity.     In  all  doubtful  eases,  and  espe-  comba*- 
cially  where  a  crime   not   capable  of   notorious  proof   was 
charged,  the  combat  was  awarded;  and  God,  as  they  deemed, 
was  the  judge.3     The  nobleman  fought  on  horseback,  with  all 
his  arms  of  attack  and  defence  ;  the  plebeian  on  foot,  with  his 
club  and  target.     The  same  were  the  weapons  of  the  cham 
pions   to  whom  women   and  ecclesiastics  were  permitted  to 
intrust  their  rights.4     If  the  combat  was  intended  to  ascer- 
tain a  civil  right,  the  vanquished  party  of  course  forfeited  his 
claim  and  paid  a  fine.     If  he  fought  by  proxy,  the  champion 
was  liable  to  have  his  hand  struck  off;  a  regulation  necessary, 

1  Coutunies  de  Beauvoisis,  p.  11.  established  by  the  laws  of  the  Alemanni 

2  It  was  lawful,  iu  such  case,  to  bor-  or  Suabians.  Baluz.  t.  i.  p.  80.  It  was 
row  the  vassals  of  the  superior  lord,  always  popular  in  Lonibardy.  Liutpraud, 
Thaumassiere  sur  Beaumauoir,  p.  375.  king  of  the  Lombards,  says  in  one  of  his 
See  Du  Cange,  v.  Pares,  an  excellent  ar-  laws,  Incerti  sumus  de  judicio  Dei,  et 
tide  ;  and  Placitum.  quosdam   audivimus    per    pugnam   sine 

In  England  a  manor  is  extinguished,  justa  causa  suam  causam  perdere.     Sed 

at  least  as  to  jurisdiction,  when  there  are  propter    consuetudinem    gentis   nostraa 

not   two   freeholders  subject  to   escheat  Langobardorum    legem    impiam  vetare 

left  as  suitors  to  the  court-barou.     Their  non  possumus.   Muratori,  Script.  Reruin 

tenancy  must  therefore  have  been  creat-  Italicarum,  t.  ii.  p.  65.     Otho  II.  estab- 

ed  before  the  statute  of  Quia  Emptores,  lished  it  in  all  disputes  concerning  real 

18  Edw.  I.  (1290),  since  which  no  new  property  ;  and   there   is  a   famous   case 

estate  in  fee-simple  can  be  held  of  the  where    the    right   of   representation,   or 

lord,  nor  consequently,  be  liable  to  es-  preference  of  the  son  of  a  deceased  elder 

cheat  te  him.  child  to  his   uncle  in  succession  to  his 

3  Trial  by  combat  does  not  seem  to  grandfather's  estate,  was  settled  by  this 
have    established    itself   completely    in  test. 

France    till    ordeals  went    into   disuse,  *  For  the  ceremonies  of  trial  by  com- 

which  Charlemagne  rather  encouraged,  bat,  see  Houard,  Anciennes  Loix  Fran- 

and  which,  in  his  age,  the  clergy  for  the  coises,  t.  i.  p.  264;  Velly,  t.  vi.  p.  106, 

most  part  approved.     The  former  species  Becueil  des  Ilistoriens,  t.  xi    preface,  p. 

of  decision,  may,  however,  be  met  with  189;  Du  Cange,  v.  Duellum.     The  great 

under  the  first  Merovingian  kings  (Greg,  original  authorities  are   the  Assises    It 

Turon.  1.  vii.  c.  19,  1.  x.  c.  10),  and  seems  Jerusalem,  c.  104,  and  Beaumanoir,  c 

to  have  prevailed  in  Burgundy.     It  is  31. 


238  TRIAL  BY  COMBAT.  Chat.  II.  Pjht  IL 

perhaps,  to  obviate  the  eorruption  of  these  hired  defenders. 
In  criminal  cases  the  appellant  suffered,  in  the  event  of  defeat, 
the  same  punishment  which  the  law  awarded  to  the  offence  of 
which  he  accused  his  adversary.1  Even  where  the  cause  was 
more  peaceably  tried,  and  brought  to  a  regular  adjudication 
by  the  court,  an  appeal  for  false  judgment  might  indeed  be 
made  to  the  suzerain,  but  it  could  only  be  tried  by  battle. 
And  in  this,  the  appellant,  if  he  would  impeach  the  concur- 
rent judgment  of  the  court  below,  was  compelled  to  meet  suc- 
cessively in  combat  every  one  of  its  members  ;  unless  he 
should  vanquish  them  all  within  the  day,  his  life,  if  he  escaped 
from  so  many  hazards,  was  forfeited  to  the  law.  If  fortune 
or  miracle  should  make  him  conqueror  in  every  contest,  the 
judges  were  equally  subject  to  death,  and  fheir  court  forfeited 
their  jurisdiction  forever.  A  less  perilous  mode  of  appeal 
was  to  call  the  first  judge  who  pronounced  a  hostile  sentence 
into  the  field.  If  the  appellant  came  off*  victorious  in  this 
challenge,  the  decision  was  reversed,  but  the  court  was  not 
impeached.3  But  for  denial  of  justice,  that  is,  for  a  refusal 
to  try  his  suit,  the  plaintiff  repaired  to  the  court  of  the  next 
superior  lord,  and  supported  his  appeal  by  testimony.4  Yet, 
even  here  the  witnesses  might  be  defied,  and  the  pure  stream 
of  justice  turned  at  once  into  the  torrent  of  barbarous  con- 
test.6 

i  Beaumanoir,  p.  315.  rain,  which  in  general  would  be  readily 

2  Id.  c.  61.  In  England  the  appeal  for  afforded.  We  find  several  instances  of 
false  judgment  to  the  king's  court  was  the  king's  interference  for  the  redress  of 
not  tried  by  battle.     Glanvil,  1.  xii.  c.  7.  injuries    in    Suger's   Life  of   Louis  VI. 

3  Id.  c.  61.  That  active  and  spirited  prince,  with  the 

4  Id.  p.  315.  The  practice  was  to  chal-  assistance  of  his  enlightened  biographer, 
lenge  the  second  witness,  since  the  testi-  recovered  a  great  part  of  the  royal  au 
mony  of  one  was  insufficient.  But  this  thority,  which  had  been  reduced  to  the 
must  be  done  before  he  completes  his  lowest  ebb  in  the  long  and  slothful  reign 
oath,  says  Beaumanoir,  for  after  he  has  of  his  father,  Philip  I.  One  passage 
bsen  sworn  he  must  be  heard  and  be-  especially  contains  a  clear  evidence  of 
lieved:  p.  316.  No  one  was  bound,  as  the  appeal  for  denial  of  justice,  and  con- 
we  may  well  believe,  to  be  a  witness  for  sequently  refutes  Mably's  opinion.  In 
another,  in  cases  where  such  au  appeal  1105  the  inhabitants  of  St.  Sevei-e,  in 
might  be  made  from  his  testimony.  Berri,  complain  of  their  lord  Humbald, 

5  Mably  is  certainly  mistaken  in  his  and  request  the  king  aut  ad  exequendam 
opinion  that  appeals  for  denial  of  justice  justitiam  cogere,  aut  jure  pro  injuria 
were  not  older  than  the  reign  of  Philip  castrum  lege  Salica  amittere.  I  quote 
Augustus.  (Observations  sur  1'IIist.  de  from  the  preface  to  the  fourteenth  volume 
F.  1.  iii.  c.  3.)  Before  this  time  the  vas-  of  the  Recueil  des  Ilistoriens,  p.  44.  It 
sal's  remedy,  he  thinks,  was  to  make  war  may  be  noticed,  by  the  way,  that  lex 
upon  his  lord.  And  this  may  probably  Salica  is  here  used  for  the  feudal  cus- 
have  been  frequently  practised.  Indeed  torus;  in  which  sense  I  believe  it  not 
it  is  permitted,  as  we  have  seen  by  the  unfrequently  occurs.  Many  proofs  nrigb> 
code  of  St.  Louis.  But  those  who  were  be  brought  of  the  interposition  of  both 
not  strong  enough  to  adopt  this  danger-  Louis  VI.  and  VII.  in  the  disputes  be- 
ous  means  of  redress  would  surely  avail  tween  their  liarons  and  arriere  vassals. 
themselves  of  the  assistance  of  the  suze-  Thus    the    war   between   the   latter  and 


Fett>al  System.    ESTABLISHMENTS  OF  ST.  LOUIS  239 

Such  was  the  judicial  system  of  France  when  St.  Louis 
enacted  that  great  code  which  bears  the  name  Estabjsh. 
of  his  Establishments.  The  rules  of  civil  and  ments  of 
criminal  procedure,  as  well  as  the  principles  of  St' Loms" 
legal  decisions,  are  there  laid  down  with  much  detail.  But 
that  incomparable  prince,  unable  to  overthrow  the  judicial 
combat,  confined  himself  to  discourage  it  by  the  example  of 
a  wiser  jurisprudence.  It  was  abolished  throughout  the 
royal  domains.  The  bailiffs  and  seneschals  who  rendered 
justice  to  the  king's  immediate  subjects  were  bound  to  follow 
his  own  laws.  He  not  only  received  appeals  from  their  sen- 
tences in  his  own  court  of  peers,  but  listened  to  all  complaints 
with  a  kind  of  patriarchal  simplicity.  "  Many  times,"  says 
Joinville,  "  I  have  seen  the  good  saint,  after  hearing  mass,  in 
the  summer  season,  lay  himself  at  the  foot  of  an  oak  in  the 
wood  of  Vincennes,  and  make  u>  all  sit  round  him;  when 
those  who  would,  came  and  spake  to  him  without  let  of  any 
officer,  and  he  would  ask  aloud  if  there  were  any  present 
who  had  suits ;  and  when  they  appeared,  would  bid  two  of 
his  bailiffs  determine  their  cause  upon  the  spot."  1 

The  influence  of  this  new  jurisprudence  established  by  St. 
Louis,  combined  with  the  great  enhancements  of  the  royal 
prerogatives  in  every  other  respect,  produced  a  rapid  change 
in  the  legal  administration  of  France.  Though  trial  by  com- 
bat occupies  a  considerable  space  in  the  work  of  Beaumanoir, 
written  under  Philip  the  Bold,  it  was  already  much  limited. 
Appeals  for  false  judgment  might  sometimes  be  tried,  as  he 
expresses  it,  par  erremens  de  plait ;  that  is,  I  presume,  where 
the  alleged  error  of  the  court  below  was  in  matter  of  law. 
For  wager  of  battle  was  chiefly  intended  to  ascertain  contro- 
verted facts.'2  So  where  the  suzerain  saw  clearly  that  the 
judgment  of  the  inferior  court  was  right,  he  ought  not  to  per- 
mit the  combat.  Or  if  the  plaintiff,  even  in  the  first  instance, 
could  produce  a  record  or  a  written  obligation,  or  if  the  fact 
before  the  court  was  notorious,  there  was  no  room  for  battle.8 

Henry  II.  of  England  in  1166  was  occa-  lishments  of   St.  Louis  are  not  the  orig 

sioned  by  his  entertaining  a  complaint  inal  constitutions  of  that  prince,  but  a 

from   the  count   of  Auvergne,   without  work   founded  on  them — a  compilation 

waiting  for   the   decision   of  Henry,   as  of  the  old  customs  blended  with  his  new 

duke  of  Guienue. — Velly,   t.  ii.  p.  190  provisions.     Esprit  des  Loix,    xxviii.   37 

Lyttelton's    Henry   II.   vol.   ii.    p.   448;  33.      I  do   not  know  that  any  later  in 

Keoueil  des  Historiens,  ubi  supra,  p.  49.  quirers  have  adopted  this  hypothesis. 

1  Collection  des  Memoires,  t.  i.  p.  25.  -  Beaumanoir,  p.  22. 

Montesquieu  supposes   that    the   Estab-  3  Id.  p.  314. 


240  ESTABLISEB1EN  I'S  OF  ST.  LOUIS.    Chap.  II,  Pakt  11. 

It  would  be  a  hard  thing,  says  Bcaumanoir,  that  if  one  had 
killed  my  near  relation  in  open  day  before  many  credible 
persons,  I  >hould  be  compelled  to  fight  in  order  to  prove  his 
death.  This  reflection  is  the  dictate  of  common  sense,  and 
shows  that  the  prejudice  in  favor  of  judicial  combat  Avas 
lying  away.  In  the  Assises  de  Jerusalem,  a  monument  of 
customs  two  hundred  years  earlier  than  the  age  of  Beau- 
manoir,  we  find  little  mention  of  any  other  mode  of  decision. 
The  compiler  of  that  book  thinks  it  would  be  very  injurious 
if  no  wager  of  battle  were  to  be  allowed  against  witnesses  in 
causes  affecting  succession ;  since  otherwise  every  right  heir 
might  be  disinherited,  as  it  would  be  easy  to  find  two  persons 
who  would  perjure  themselves  for  money,  if  they  had  no  fear 
of  being  challenged  for  their  testimony.1  This  passage  indi- 
cates the  real  cause  of  preserving  the  judicial  combat,  sys- 
tematic perjury  hi  witnesses,  and  want  of  legal  discrimination 
in  judges. 

It  was,  in  all  civil  suits,  at  the  discretion  of  the  litigant 
parties  to  adopt  the  law  of  the  Establishments,  instead  of 
resorting  to  combat.2  As  gentler  manners  prevailed,  espe- 
cially among  those  who  did  not  make  arms  their  profession, 
the  wisdom  and  equity  of  the  new  code  was  naturally  pre- 
ferred. The  superstition  which  had  originally  led  to  the 
latter  lost  its  weight  through  experience  and  the  uniform 
opposition  of  the  clergy.  The  same  superiority  of  just  and 
settled  rules  over  fortune  and  violence,  which  had  forwarded 
the  encroachments  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts,  was  now  mani- 
fested in  those  of  the  king.  Philip  Augustus,  by  a  famous 
ordinance  in  1190,  first  established  royal  courts  of  justice, 
held  by  the  officers  called  bailiffs  or  seneschals,  who  acted  as 
the  king's  lieutenants  in  his  domains.3  Every  barony,  as  it 
became  reunited  to  the  crown,  was  subjected  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  one  of  these  officers,  and  took  the  name  of  a  bailliage  or 
seneschaussee  ;  the  former  name  prevailing  most  in  the  north- 
ern, the  latter  in  the  southern,  provinces.  The  vassals  whose 
lands  depended  upon,  or,  in  feudal  language,  moved,  from  the 
superiority  of  this  fief,  were  obliged  to  submit  to  the  ressort 
or  supreme  appellant  jurisdiction  of  the  royal  court  estab- 
lished in  it.4     This  began  rapidly  to  encroach  upon  the  feudal 

i  C.  167.  l'Acad.  des  Inscriptions,  t.  xxx.  p.  603 

2  Beaumanoir,  p.  309.  Mably,  1.  iv.  <•    4.    Boulainvilliers,    t.  ii 

3  Ordonnances  des  Rois.  t.  i.  p.  18.  p.  22" 
Du    Cange,    v.    Balivi.       Mem.  de 


fKCDAL  System.  ROYAL  TRIBUNALS.  2-1 1 

rights  of  justice.     In  a  variety  of  cases,  termed  royal,  the 
territorial  court  was  pronounced  incompetent ;  the}-  R0Yai 
were  reserved  for  the  judges  of  the  crown;  and,  tnbunals> 

<f       o  7  '  and  progress 

in  every  case,  unless  the  detendant  excepted  to  the  of  their 
jurisdiction,  the  royal  court  might  take  cognizance  Junsdictl0n 
of  a  suit,  and  decide  it  in  exclusion  of  the  feudal  judicature.1 
The  nature  of  cases  reserved  under  the  name  of  royal  was 
kept  in  studied  ambiguity,  under  cover  of  which  the  judges 
of  the  crown  perpetually  strove  to  multiply  them.  Louis  X., 
when  requested  by  the  barons  of  Champagne  to  explain 
what  was  meant  by  royal  causes,  gave  this  mysterious  defini 
tion :  Everything  which  by  right  or  custom  ought  exclu- 
sively to  come  under  the  cognizance  of  a  sovereign  prince.2 
Vassals  were  permitted  to  complain  in  the  first  instance  to 
the  king's  court,  of  injuries  committed  by  their  lords.  These 
rapid  and  violent  encroachments  left  the  nobility  no  alterna- 
tive but  armed  combinations  to  support  their  remonstrances. 
Philip  the  Fair  bequeathed  to  his  successor  the  task  of 
appeasing  the  storm  which  his  own  administration  had  ex- 
cited. Leagues  were  formed  in  most  of  the  northern  provin- 
ces for  the  redress  of  grievances,  in  which  the  third  estate, 
oppressed  by  taxation,  united  with  the  vassals,  whose  feu- 
dal privileges  had  been  infringed.  Separate  charters  were 
granted  to  each  of  these  confederacies  by  Louis  Hutin, 
which  contain  many  remedial  provisions  against  the  grosser 
violations  of  ancient  rights,  though  the  crown  persisted  in 
restraining  territorial  jurisdiction.3  Appeals  became  more 
common  for  false  judgment,  as  well  as  denial  of  right ;  and 
in  neither  was  the  combat  permitted.  It  was  still,  however, 
preserved  in  accusations  of  heinous  crimes,  unsupported  by 
any  testimony  but  that  of  the  prosecutor,  and  was  never 
abolished  by  any  positive  law,  either  in  France  or  England. 
But  instances  of  its  occurrence  are  not  frequent  even  in  the 
fourteenth  century ;  and  one  of  these,  rather  remarkable  in 
its  circumstances,  must  have  had  a  tendency  to  explode  the 

i  Mably,  Boulainyilliers,  Montlosier,  t  curiis  audiantur,  vel  in  alio  casu  ad  nos 

f.  p.  104.  pertinenti.     Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  i 

2  Ordonnances  des  Rois,  p.  606.  p.  362.     This  ordinance  is  of  Philip  the 

3  Hoc  perpetuo  prohibemus  edicto.  ne  Fair,  io  1302;  but  those  passed  under 
gubditi,  seu  justiciaries  pi'aelatorura  aut  Louis  Hutin  are  to  the  same  effect.  They 
baronuui  nostrorum,  aut  aliorum  subjec-  may  be  read  at  length  in  the  Ordonnancei 
torum  nostrorum .  trahantur  in  causam  des  Rois;  or  abridged  by  BoulainviTiers, 
coram  nostris    officialibus,   nee    eorum  t.  ii.  p.  94. 

causae,  nisi  in  casu  ressorti,  in  nostris 
VOL.    I.  — M.  16 


242  ROYAL  COUNCIL.  Chap.  II.  Part  IL 

remaining  superstition  which  had  preserved  this  mode  of 
decision.1 

The  supreme  council,  or  court  of  peers,  to  whose  deliberate 

functions  I  have  already  adverted,  was  also  the 
council,  great  judicial  tribunal  of  the  French  crown  from 
of  pe^re.        tne  accession  of  Hugh  Capet.2     By  this  alone  the 

barons  of  France,  or  tenant-  in  chief  of  the  king, 
could  be  judged.  To  this  court  appeals  for  denials  of  justice 
were  referred.  It  was  originally  composed,  as  has  been  ob- 
served, of  the  feudal  vassals,  coequals  of  those  who  were  to 
be  tried  by  it ;  and  also  of  the  household  officers,  whose  right 
of  concurrence,  however  anomalous,  was  extremely  ancient 
But  after  the  business  of  the  court  came  to  increase  through 
the  multiplicity  of  appeals,  especially  from  the  bailiffs  estab- 
lished by  Philip  Augustus  in  the  royal  domains,  the  barons 
found  neither  leisure  nor  capacity  for  the  ordinary  administra- 
tion of  justice,  and  reserved  their  attendance  for  occasion^ 
where  some  of  their  own  orders  were  implicated  in  a  criminal 
process.  St.  Louis,  anxious  for  regularity  and  enlightened 
decisions,  made  a  considerable  alteration  by  introducing  some 
Cours  councillors  of  inferior   rank,  chiefly  ecclesiastics, 

piemeres.  as  a(jvisers  0f  the  court,  though,  as  is  supposed, 
without  any  decisive  suffrage.  The  court  now  became  known 
by  the  name  of  parliament.  Registers  of  its  proceedings 
were  kept,  of  which  the  earliest  extant  are  of  the  year  1254. 
It  was  still  perhaps,  in  some  degree  ambulatory ;  but  by  far 
the  greater  part  of  its  sessions  in  the  thirteenth  century  were 
at  Paris.  The  councillors  nominated  by  the  king,  some  of 
them  clerks,  others  of  noble  rank,  but  not  peers  of  the  ancient 
baronage,  acquired  insensibly  a  right  of  suffrage.8 

An  ordinance  of  Philip  the  Fair,  in  1302,  is  generally 
Parliament  supposed  to  have  fixed  the  seat  of  parliament  at 
of  Pans.        Paris,  as  well  as  altered  its   constituent   parts.4 

1  Philip  IV.  restricted  trial  by  combat  the  same  conditions  as  in  France.     Pink 

to  cases  where  four  conditions  were  unit-  erton's  Hist,  of  Scotl.  vol.  i.  p.  66. 

ed.    The  crime  must  be  capital ;  its  com-  -  [Note  XVIT.] 

mission  certain  ;  The  accused  greatly  sus-  3  Boulainvilliers,  t.  ii.  p.  29,  44  ;  Mably , 
pected;  And  no  proof  to  be  obtained  by  1.  iv.  c.2;  Encyclopedic  art.  Parlement ; 
witnesses.  Under  these  limitations,  or  Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscript.  t.  xxx.  p. 
at  least  some  of  them,  for  it  appears  that  603.  The  great  difficulty  I  have  found 
they  were  not  all  regarded,  instances  oc-  in  this  investigation  will  plead  my  ex- 
cur  for  some  centuries.  cuse  if  errors  are  detected. 

See  the  singular  story  of  Carouges  and  4  Pannier  (Recherchefi   de  la  France, 

^  Gris.  to  which  I  allude  in  the  text.  1.  ii.  c.  8)  published  this  ordinance,  which. 

Villaret,  t.  xi.  p.  412.     Trial  by  combat  indeed,  as  the  editor  of  Ordounanees  des 

was  allowed  in  Scotland  exactly  under  Hois,  t.  i.  p.  547,  observes,  is  no  ordinance, 


Feudal  System.  PEERS  OF  FRANCE.  243 

Perhaps  a  series  of  progressive  changes  has  been  referred  to 
a  single  epoch.  But  whether  by  virtue  of  this  ordinance,  or 
of  more  gradual  events,  the  character  of  the  whole  feudal 
court  was  nearly  obliterated  in  that  of  the  parliament  of 
Paris.  A  systematic  tribunal  took  the  place  of  a  loose 
aristocratic  assembly.  It  was  to  hold  two  sittings  in  the 
year,  each  of  two  months'  duration ;  it  was  composed  of  two 
prelates,  two  counts,  thirteen  clerks,  and  as  many  laymen. 
Great  changes  were  made  afterwards  in  this  constitution. 
The  nobility,  who  originally  sat  there,  grew  weary  of  an 
attendance  which  detained  them  from  war,  and  from  their 
favorite  pursuits  at  home.  The  bishops  were  dismissed  to 
their  necessary  residence  upon  their  sees.1  As  obligations 
they  withdrew,  a  class  of  regular  lawyers,  origi-  of  a  vassal 
nally  employed,  as  it  appears,  in  the  preparatory  business, 
without  any  decisive  voice,  came  forward  to  the  higher  places, 
and  established  a  complicated  and  tedious  system  of  proce- 
dure, which  was  always  characteristic  of  French  jurisprudence. 

They  introduced  at  the  same  time  a  new  theory  of  abso- 
lute power,  and  unlimited  obedience.     All  feudal  Decline  of 
privileges  were  treated  as  encroachments  on  the  the  feudal 
imprescriptible    rights    of  monarchy.      With    the  S}S  m' 
natural  bias  of  lawyers  in  favor  of  prerogative  conspired 
that  of  the  clergy,  who  fled  to  the  king  for  refuge  against  the 
tyranny  of  the  barons.     In  the  civil  and  canon  laws  a  system 
of  political  maxims  was  found  very  uncongenial  to  the  feudal 
customs.    The  French  lawyers  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries  frequently  give  their  king  the  title  of  emperor, 
and  treat  di-obedience  to  him  as  sacrilege.2 

But  among  these  lawyers,  although  the  general  tenants  o^ 
the  crown  by  barony  ceased  to  appear,  there  still  peers  of 
continued  to  sit  a  more  eminent  body,  the  lay  and  Fr:ince- 
spiritual  peers  of  France,  representatives,  as  it  were,  of  that 
ancient  baronial  aristocracy.  It  is  a  very  controverted 
question  at  what  time  this  exclusive  dignity  of  peerage,  a 
word  obviously  applicable  by  the  feudal  law  to  all  persons 
coequal  in  degree  of  tenure,  was  reserved  to  twelve  vassals. 
At  the  coronation  of  Philip  Augustus,  in  1179,  we  first  per- 

but  a  regulation  for  the  execution  of  one  the  best  authorities  I  hare  found.  There 

previously  made  ;    nor  does  it  establish  may  very  possibly  be  superior  works  on 

the  residence  of  the  parliament  in  Paris,  this  branch  of  the  French  constitution 

i  Velly.  Hist  de  France,  t.  vii.  p.  303,  which  have  not  fallen  into  my  hands, 

and   Encyclopedie,  art.    Parlement.   are  -  Mably,  1.  iv.  c.  2.  note  10 


244  JURISDICTION   OF  PARLIAMENT.    Chap.  II.  Part  II 

ceive  the  six  great  feudataries,  dukes  of  Burgundy,  Nor- 
mandy, Guienne,  counts  of  Toulouse,  Flanders,  Champagne, 
distinguished  by  the  offices  they  performed  in  that  ceremony. 
It  was  natural,  indeed,  that,  by  their  princely  splendor  and 
importance,  they  should  eclipse  such  petty  lords  as  Bourbon 
and  Coucy.  however  equal  in  quality  of  tenure.  During  the 
reign  of  Philip  Augustus,  six  ecclesiastical  peers,  the  duke- 
bishops  of  Rheims,  Laon,  and  Langres,  the  count-bishops  of 
Beauvais,  Chalons,  and  Noyon,  were  added  as  a  -ort  of 
parallel  or  counterpoise.1  Their  precedence  does  not,  how- 
ever, appear  to  have  carried  with  it  any  other  privilege,  at 
least  in  judicature,  than  other  barons  enjoyed.  But  their 
preeminence  being  fully  confirmed,  Philip  the  Fair  set  the 
precedent  of  augmenting  their  original  number,  by  conferring 
the  dignity  of  peerage  on  the  duke  of  Britany  and  the  count 
of  Artois.2  Other  creations  took  place  subsequently ;  but 
these  were  confined,  during  the  period  comprised  in  this 
work,  to  princes  of  the  royal  blood.  The  peers  were  con- 
stant members  of  the  parliament,  from  which  other  vassal^ 
holding  in  chief,  were  never,  perhaps,  excluded  by  law,  but 
their  attendance  was  rare  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  soon 
afterwards  ceased  altogether.3 

A  judicial  body,  composed  of  the  greatest  nobles  in  France, 
as  well  as  of  learned  and  eminent  lawyers,  must 

l^rOorTGSS  of  -■  m 

the  jurisdic-    naturally  have  soon  become  politically  important. 
tion.of  tht      Notwithstanding  their  disposition  to  enhance  every 

parliament.  ,°  l  J 

royal  prerogative,  as  opposed  to  feudal  privileges, 
the  parliament  was  not  disinclined  to  see  its  own  protection 
invoked  by  the  subject.  It  appears  by  an  ordinance  of 
Charles  V.,  in  1371,  that  the  nobility  of  Languedoc  had 
appealed  to  the  parliament  of  Paris  against  a  tax  imposed 
by  the  king's  authority  ;  and  this,  at  a  time  when  the  French 
constitution  did  not  recognize  the  levying  of  money  without 
consent  of  the  States- General,  must  have  been  a  just  ground 
of  appeal,  though  the  present  ordinance  annuls  and  overturns 
it.4  During  the  tempests  of  Charles  VI.'s  unhappy  reign 
the  parliament  acquired  a  more  decided  authority,  and  held, 
in  some  degree,  the  balance  between  the  contending  factions 
of  Orleans  and  Burgundy.     This  influence  was  partly  owing 

l  Velly,  t.  ii.  p.  287  ;  t.  iii.  p.  221 ;  t.  it.         3  Encyclopedic,  art.  Parlement,  p.  6 
P-  41  <  Mably,  1.  v.  c.  5,  note  6. 

«  Id.  t.  vii.  p.  97. 


Feudal  System.     REGISTRATION"  OF  ROYAL  EDICTS.  245 

to  one  remarkable  function  attributed  to  the  parliament, 
which  raised  it  much  above  the  level  of  a  merely  political 
tribunal,  and  has  at  various  times  wrought  striking  effects 
in  the  French  monarchy. 

The  few  ordinances  enacted  by  kings  of  France  in  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  were  generally  by  the  advice 
of  their  royal  council,  in  which  probably  they  were  solemnly 
declared  as  well  as  agreed  upon.  But  after  the 
gradual  revolution  of  government,  which  took  away  enre^stered 
from  the  feudal  aristocracy  all  control  over  the  in  pac- 
king's edicts,  and  substituted  a  new  magistracy  for 
the  ancient  baronial  court,  these  legislative  ordinances  were 
commonly  drawn  up  by  the  interior  council,  or  what  we  may 
call  the  ministry.  They  were  in  some  instances  promulgated 
by  the  king  in  parliament.  Others  Avere  sent  thither  for 
registration  or  entry  upon  their  records.  This  formality  was 
by  degrees,  if  not  from  the  beginning,  deemed  essential  to 
render  them  authentic  and  notorious,  and  therefore  indirectly 
gave  them  the  sanction  and  validity  of  a  law.1  Such,  at 
least,  appears  to  have  been  the  received  doctrine  before  the 
end  of  the  fourteenth  century.  It  has  been  contended  by 
Mably,  among  other  writers,  that  at  so  early  an  epoch  the 
parliament  of  Paris  did  not  enjoy,  nor  even  claim  to  itself, 
that  anomalous  right  of  judging  the  expediency  of  edicts 
proceeding  from  the  king,  which  afterwards  so  remarkably 
modified  the  absoluteness  of  his  power.  In  the  fifteenth 
century,  however,  it  certainly  manifested  pretensions  of  this 
nature :  first,  by  registering  ordinances  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  testify  its  own  unwillingness  and  disapprobation,  of  which 
one  instance  occurs  as  early  as  1418,  and  another  in  1443; 
and,  afterwards,  by  remonstrating  against  and  delaying  the 
registration  of  laws  which  it  deemed  inimical  to  the  public 
interest.  A  conspicuous  proof  of  this  spirit  was  given  in 
their  opposition  to  Louis  XL  when  repealing  the  Pragmatic 
Sanction  of  his  father  —  an  ordinance  essential,  in  their 
opinion,  to  the  liberties  of  the  Gallican  church.  In  this 
instance  they  ultimately  yielded ;  but  at  another  time  they 
persisted  in  a  refusal  to  enregister  letters  containing  an 
alienation  of  the  royal  domain.2 

The  counsellors  of   parliament  were  originally  appointed 

1  Encyclopedic,  art.  Parlement.  Gamier,  Hist,  de  France,  t.  xvii.  p.  219- 

«  Mablv,     .  vi.  c.  5,  rotes  19  and  21 ,    380. 


246  COUNSELLORS  OF  PARLIAMENT.    Crap.  II.  Part  n 

by  the  king ;  and  they  were,  even  changed  according  to  cir- 
cumstances. Charles  V.  made  the  first  alteration,  by  per- 
mitting them  to  fill  up  vacancies  by  election,  which  u-age 
continued  during  the  next  reign.  Charles  VII.  resumed  the 
Counsellors  nomination  of  fresh  members  upon  vacancies, 
of  parii.-imea  Louis  XL  even  displaced  actual  counsellors.  But 
fife  and  by  in  1468,  from  whatever  motive,  lie  published  a 
election.  most  important  ordinance,  declaring  the  presidents 
and  counsellors  of  parliament  immovable,  except  in  case  of 
legal  forfeiture.1  This  extraordinary  measure  of  conferring 
independence  on  a  body  which  had  already  displayed  a  con- 
sciousness of  its  eminent  privilege  by  opposing  the  regis- 
tration of  his  edicts,  is  perhaps  to  be  deemed  a  proof  of  that 
shortsightedness  as  to  points  of  substantial  interest  so  usually 
found  in  crafty  men.  But,  be  this  as  it  may,  there  was 
formed  in  the  parliament  of  Paris  an  independent  power  not 
emanating  from  the  royal  will,  nor  liable,  except  through 
force,  to  be  destroyed  by  it ;  which,  in  later  times,  became 
almost  the  sole  depositary,  if  not  of  what  we  should  call  the 
love  of  freedom,  yet  of  public  spirit  and  attachment  to  justice. 
France,  so  fertile  of  great  men  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries,  might  better  spare,  perhaps,  from  her  annals 
any  class  and  description  of  them  than  her  lawyers.  Doubt- 
less the  parliament  of  Pari-,  with  its  prejudices  and  narrow 
views,  its  high  notions  of  loyal  obedience  so  strangely  mixed 
up  with  remonstrances  and  resistance,  its  anomalous  privi- 
lege of  objecting  to  edicts,  hardly  approved  by  the  nation 
who  did  not  participate  in  it,  and  overturned  with  facility  by 
the  king  whenever  he  thought  fit  to  exert  the  sinews  of  his 
prerogative,  was  but  an  inadequate  substitute  for  that  co- 
ordinate sovereignty,  that  equal  concurrence  of  national 
representatives  in  legislation,  which  has  long  been  the  ex- 
clusive pride  of  our  government,  and  to  which  the  States- 
General  of  France,  in  their  best  days,  had  never  aspired. 
No  man  of  sane  understanding  would  desire  to  revive  insti- 
tutions both  uncongenial  to  modern  opinions  and  to  the 
natural  order  of  society.  Yet  the  name  of  the  parliament 
of  Paris  must  ever  be  respectable.  It  exhibited  upon  vari- 
ous occasions  virtues  from  which  human  esteem  is  as  insepa- 
rable as  the  shadow  from  the  substance  —  a  severe  adherence 
to  principles,  an  unaccommodating  sincerity,  individual  disin- 

1   Villaret,  t.  xiv.  p.  231 ;  Eucyclopedie,  art.  Parlement. 


■  Feudal  System.    DECLINE   OF  FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  247 

fcerestedness  and  consistency.     Whether  indeed  these  quali 
ties   have  been    so   generally  characteristic    of   the  French 
people  as  to  afford  no  peculiar  commendation  to  the  parlia- 
ment of  Paris,  it  is  rather -for  the  observer  of  the  present  day 
than  the  historian  of  past  times  to  decide.1 

The  principal  causes  that  operated  in  subverting  the  feudal 
system  may  be  comprehended  under  three  distinct  Cause8  of 
heads  —  the  increasing  power  of  the  crown,  the  the  decline 
elevation  of  the  lower  ranks,  and  the  decay  of  the  system.  "  a 
feudal  principle. 

It  has  been  my  object  in  the  last  pages  to  point  out  the 
acquisitions  of  power  by  the  crown  of  France  in 

_  A  en  ui^i  tiOD8 

respect  of  legislative  and  judicial  authority.    The  0f  power  by 
principal   augmentations  of  its  domain  have  been  the  crown- 
historically  mentioned  in  the  last  chapter,  but  the  Au^menta- 
subject  may  here   require   further   notice.     The  tion  °.f  the 
French   kings  naturally  acted  upon  a   system,  in 
order  to  recover  those  possessions  which  the  improvidence 
or  necessities  of  the  Carlovingian  race  had  suffered  almost 
to  fall  away  from  the  monarchy.     This  course,  pursued  with 
tolerable  steadiness  for  two  or  three  centuries,  restored  their 
effective  power.     By  escheat  or  forfeiture,  by  bequest  or 
purchase,  by  marriage  or  succession,  a  number  of  fiefs  were 
merged  in  their   increasing  domain.3     It  was  part  of  their 

1  The  province  of  Languedoc,  with  its  other  countries,  during  the  middle  ages, 

dependencies  of  Quercy  and  Rouergue,  I  allude  to  L'Esprit,  Origine.  et  Progrea 

having  belonged  almost  in   full   sover-  des   Institutions  judiciaires   des   princi- 

eignty  to  the  counts  of  Toulouse,  was  not  paux  Pays  de  l'Europe.  by  M.  Meyer,  of 

perhaps  subject  to  the  feudal  resort  or  Amsterdam;  especially  the  first  and  third 

appellant  jurisdiction  of  any  tribunal  at  volumes.     It  would  have  been  fortunate 

Paris.     Philip  the  Bold,  after  its  reuuiou  had  its  publication  preceded  that  of  the 

to  the  crown,  established  the  parliament  first  edition  of  the  present  work;  as  I 

of  Toulouse,  a  tribunal  without  appeal,  might  have  rendered  this  chapter  on  the 

in  1280.     This  was,  however,  suspended  feudal  system   in   many    respects    more 

from  1291  to  144o.  during  which  interval  perspicuous  and  correct.     As  it  is,  with- 

the    parliament   of    Paris    exercised    an  out  availing  myself  of  M.  Meyer's  learu- 

appellant  jurisdiction   over   Languedoc.  ing  and  acuteness  to   illustrate  the  ob- 

Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Lang.  t.  iv.  p.  60,  71,  scurity  of  these  researches,  or  discussing 

624.     Sovereign   courts    or    parliaments  the  few  questions  upon  which  I  might 

were  established  by  Charles  VII.  at  Gre-  venture,   with   deference,   to   adhere   to 

noble  for  Dauphine,  aud  by  Louis  XI.  at  another  opinion,  neither  of  which  could 

Bordeaux   and   Dijon   for   Guienne    and  conveniently   be   done   on    the    present 

Burgundy.     The  parliament  of  Rouen  is  occasion,  I  shall  content  myself  with  this 

not  so  ancient.    These  institutions  rather  general   reference   to  a   performance  of 

diminished  the  resort  of  the  parliament  singular  diligence  and  ability,  which  no 

of  Paris,  which  had  extended  over  Bur-  student  of  these  antiquities  should  neg- 

gundy,  and,  in  time  of  peace,  over  Gui-  lect.     In  all  essential  points  I  am  happy 

enne.  to  perceive  that  M.  Meyer's  views  of  the 

A   work   has  appeared   within    a    few  middle  ages  are  not  far  different  from  my 

years  which  throws  an  abundant  light  on  own.  —  Note  to  the  fourth  edit. 

the  judicial  Byste.m,  and  indeed  on  the  -  The  word  domain  is  calculated,  by  a 

ffhole  civil  polity  of  France,  as.  well  as  seeming  ambiguity,  to  perplex  the  reader 


248 


CAUSES   OF  DECLINE        Chap.  II.  Part  II 


policy  to  obtain  possession  of  arriere-fiefs,  and  thus  to  be 
come  tenants  of  their  own  barons.  In  such  cases  the  king 
was  obliged  by  the  feudal  duties  to  perform  homage,  by 
proxy,  to  his  subjects,  and  engage  himself  to  the  service  of 
his  fief.  But,  for  every  political  purpose,  it  is  evident  that 
the  lord  could  have  no  command  over  so  formidable  a 
vassal.1 

The  reunion  of  so  man)  fiefs  was  attempted  to  be  secured 
by  a  legal  principle,  that  the  domain  was  inalienable  and 
imprescriptible.  This  became  at  length  a  fundamental 
maxim  in  the  law  of  France.  But  it  does  not  seem  to  be 
much  older  than  the  reign  of  Philip  V.,  who,  in  1318, 
revoked  the  alienations  of  his  predecessors,  nor  was  it 
thoroughly  established,  even  in  theory,  till  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury.2 Alienations,  however,  were  certainly  very  repugnant 
to  the  policy  of  Philip  Augustus  and  St.  Louis.  But  there 
was  one  species  of  infeudation  so  consonant  to  ancient  usage 
and  prejudice  that  it  could  not  be  avoided  upon  any  sugges- 
tions of  policy  ;  this  was  the  investiture  of  younger  princes 
of  the  blood  with  considerable  territorial  appanages.    It  is 


of  French  history.  In  its  primary  sense, 
the  domain  or  desmesne  (dominicum)  of 
any  proprietor  was  confined  to  the  lands 
in  his  immediate  occupation;  excluding 
those  of  which  his  tenants,  whether  in 
fief  or  villenage,  whether  for  a  certain 
estate  or  at  will,  had  an  actual  posses- 
sion, or,  in  our  law-language,  pernancy 
of  the  profits.  Thus  the  compilers  of 
Domesday-Book  distinguish,  in  every 
manor,  the  lands  held  by  the  lord  in 
demesne  from  those  occupied  by  his 
villeins  or  others  tenants.  And  in  Eug- 
land  the  word,  if  not  technically,  yet  in 
use,  is  still  confined  to  this  sense.  But 
in  a  secondary  acceptation,  more  usual 
in  France,  the  domain  comprehended  all 
lands  for  which  rent  was  paid  (censives), 
and  which  contributed  to  the  regular 
annual  revenue  of  the  proprietor.  The 
great  distinction  was  between  lands  in 
demesne  and  those  in  fief.  A  grant  of 
territory,  whether  by  the  king  or  another 
lord,  comprising  as  well  domanial  estates 
and  tributary  towns  as  feudal  superiori- 
ties, was  expressed  to  convey  "in  domi- 
nico  quod  est  in  dominico,  et  in  feodo 
quod  est  in  feodo."  Since,  therefore,  fiefs, 
even  those  of  the  vavassors  or  inferior 
tenantry,  were  not  part  of  the  lord's 
domain,  there  is,  as  I  raid,  an  apparent 
ambiguity  in  the  language  of  hi>toriuns 
who  speak  of  the  reunion  of  provinces  to 


the  royal  domain.  This  ambiguity,  how- 
ever, is  rather  apparent  than  real.  When 
the  duchy  of  Normandy,  for  example,  is 
said  to  have  been  united  by  Philip  Au- 
gustus to  his  domain,  we  are  not,  of 
course,  to  suppose  that  the  soil  of  that 
province  became  the  private  estate  of 
the  crown.  It  continued,  as  before,  in 
the  possession  of  the  Norman  barons  and 
their  sub-vassals,  who  had  held  their  es- 
tates of  the  dukes.  But  it  is  meant  on- 
ly that  the  king  of  France  stood  exactly 
in  the  place  of  the  duke  of  Normandy, 
with  the  same  rights  of  possession  over 
lands  absolutely  in  demesne,  of  rents  and 
customary  payments  from  the  burgesses 
of  towns  and  tenants  in  roture  or  villen- 
age, and  of  feudal  services  I'rom  the  mil- 
itary vassals.  The  immediate  superiori- 
ty, and  the  immediate  resort,  or  juris- 
diction, over  these  devolved  to  the  crown; 
and  thus  the  duchy  of  Normandy,  con- 
sidered as  a  fief,  was  reunited,  or,  more 
properly,  merged  in  the  royal  domain, 
though  a  very  small  part  of  the  territory 
might  become  truly  domanial. 

1  Sec  a  memorial  on  the  acquisition  of 
arriere-fiefs  by  the  kings  of  France,  in 
Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscript.  t.  i.  by  M 
Dacier. 

2  Preface  au  15me  tome  des  Ordon- 
nances,  par  M.  Pastoret. 


Fbcdax  System.      OF  THE  FEUDAL  SYSTEM.  249 

remarkable  that  the  epoch  of  appanages  on  so  great  a  scale 
was  the  reign  of  St.  Louis  whose  efforts  were  constantly 
directed  against  feudal  independence.  Yet  he  invested  his 
brothers  with  the  counties  of  Poitou,  Anjou,  and  Artois, 
and  his  sons  with  those  of  Clermont  and  Alencon.  This 
practice,  in  later  times,  produced  very  mischievous  conse- 
quences. 

Under  a  second  class  of  events  that  contributed  to  destroy 
the  spirit  of  the  feudal  system  we  may  reckon  the  abolition 
of  villenage,  the  increase  of  commerce  and  consequent  opu 
lence  of  merchants  and  artisans,  and  especially  the  institu- 
tions of  free  cities  and  boroughs.  This  is  one  of  the  most 
important  and  interesting  steps  in  the  progress  of  society 
during  the  middle  ages,  and  deserves  particular  consider- 
ation. 

The  provincial  cities  under  the  Roman  empire  enjoyed,  as 
is  well  known,  a  municipal   magistracy  and  the  Free  and 
right  of  internal  regulation.     Nor  was  it  repug-  ^rr£red 
nant  to  the  spirit  of  the  Frank  or   Gothic  con- 
querors  to  leave  them  in  possession  of  these  privileges.     It 
was  long  believed,  however,  that  little,  if  any,  satisfactory 
proof  of  their  preservation,  either  in  France  or  Italy,  could 
be  found ;  or,  at  least,  if  they  had  ever  existed,  that  they 
were  wholly  swept  away  in  the  former  country  during  the 
confusion  of  the  ninth  century,  which  ended  in  the  establish- 
ment of  the  feudal  system. 

Every  town,  except  within  the  royal  domains,  was  subject 
to  some  lord.  In  episcopal  cities  the  bishop  possessed  a 
considerable  authority ;  and  in  many  there  was  a  class  of 
resident  nobility.  But  this  subject  has  been  better  eluci- 
dated of  late  years ;  and  it  has  been  made  to  appear  that 
instances  of  municipal  government  were  at  least  not  rare, 
especially  in  the  south  of  France,  throughout  the  long 
period  between  the  fall  of  the  western  empire  and  the  be- 
ginning of  the  twelfth  century,1  though  becoming  far  more 
common  in  its  latter  part. 

The  earliest  charters  of  community  granted  to  towns  in 
France  have  been  commonly  referred  to  the  time  Earliest 
of  Louis  VI.     Noyon,  St.   Quentin,    Laon,   and  charters. 
Amiens  appear  to  have  been  the  first  that  received  emanci 

i  [Note  XVIEL] 


250  CAUSES   OF   DECLINE        Chap.  II.  Part  IL 

pation  at  the  hands  of  this  prince.1  The  chief  towns  in  the 
royal  domains  were  successively  admitted  to  the  same  privi- 
leges during  the  reigns  of  Louis  VI.,  Louis  VII.,  and  Philip 
Augustus.  This  example  was  gradually  followed  by  the 
peers  and  oilier  barons;  so  that  by  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century  the  custom  had  prevailed  over  all  France.  It  has 
Causes  of  been  sometimes  imagined  that  the  crusades  had 
granting        a  material  influence  in  promoting  the  erection  of 

them  not  to  .  .  ~.  r     . .  .        °  .  n    . 

be  found  in  communities,  lnose  expeditions  would  nave  re- 
the  crusades.,  ^xljt|  Europe  for  the  prodigality  of  crimes  and 
miseries  which  attended  them  if  this  notion  were  founded 
in  reality.  But  I  confess  that  in  this,  as  in  most  other 
respects,  their  beneficial  consequences  appear  to  me  very 
much  exaggerated.  The  cities  of  Italy  obtained  their 
internal  liberties  by  gradual  encroachments,  and  by  the  con- 
cessions of  the  Franconian  emperors.  Those  upon  the 
Rhine  owed  many  of  their  privileges  to  the  same  monarchs, 
whose  cause  they  had  espoused  in  the  rebellions  of  Germany. 
In  France  the  charters  granted  by  Louis  the  Fat  could  hard- 
ly be  connected  with  the  first  crusade,  in  which  the  crown 
had  taken  no  part,  and  were  long  prior  to  the  second.  It 
was  not  till  fifty  years  afterwards  that  the  barons  seem  to 
have  trod  in  his  steps  by  granting  charters  to  their  vassals, 
and  these  do  not  appear  to  have  been  particularly  related  in 
time  to  any  of  the  crusades.  Still  less  can  the  corporations 
erected  by  Henry  II.  in  England  be  ascribed  to  these  holy 
wars,  in  which  our  country  had  hitherto  taken  no  consider- 
able share. 

The  establishment  of  chartered  towns  in  France  has  also 
nor  in  been   ascribed   to  deliberate  policy.     ''Louis  the 

deliberate  Gross,"  says  Robertson,  "  in  order  to  create  some 
poicy'  power    that   might    counterbalance    those   potent 

vassals  who  controlled  or  gave  law  to  the  crown,  first 
adopted  the  plan  of  conferring  new  privileges  on  the  towns 
situated  within  his  own  domain."  Yet  one  does  not  im- 
mediat3ly  perceive  what  strength  the  king  could  acquire  by 
granting  these  extensive  privileges  within  his  own  domains, 
if  the  great  vassals  were  only  weakened,  as  he  asserts  after- 
wards, by  following  his  example.  In  what  sense,  besides, 
can  it  be  meant  that  Noyon  or  Amiens,  by  obtaining  certain 

1  Ordonnances  des  Hois,  ubi  supra,  p.  7.     These  charter?  are  as  old  as  1110,  lu1 
Ihe  precise  date  is  unknown. 


Feudal  Si  stem.     OF   THE  FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  25] 

franchises,  became  a  power  that  could  counterbalance  the 
duke  of  Normandy  or  count  of  Champagne  ?  It  is  more 
natural  to  impute  this  measure,  both  in  the  king  and  his 
barons,  to  their  pecuniary  exigencies  ;  for  we  could  hardly 
doubt  that  their  concessions  were  sold  at  the  highest  price, 
even  if  the  existing  charters  did  not  exhibit  the  fullest  proof 
of  it.1  It  is  obvious,  however,  that  the  coarser  methods  of 
rapine  must  have  grown  obsolete,  and  the  rights  of  the  in- 
habitants of  towns  to  property  established,  before  they  could 
enter  into  any  compact  with  their  lord  for  the  circum- 
purchase   of  liberty.     Guibert,  abbot  of  St.  No-  s^nce* 

t  i  i  f  i  o        attending 

gent,  near  JLaon,  relates  the  establishment  or  a  the  treaty 
community  in  that  city  with  circumstances,  that,  in  of  Laoa* 
the  main,  might  probably  occur  in  any  other  place.  Con- 
tinual acts  of  violence  and  robbery  having  been  committed, 
which  there  was  no  police  adequate  to  prevent,  the  clergy 
and  principal  inhabitants  agreed  to  enfranchise  the  populace 
for  a  sum  of  money,  and  to  bind  the  whole  society  by  regula- 
tions for  general  security.  These  conditions  were  gladly  ac- 
cepted ;  the  money  was  paid,  and  the  leading  men  swore  to 
maintain  the  privileges  of  the  inferior  freemen.  The  bishop 
of  Laon,  who  happened  to  be  absent,  at  first  opposed  this 
new  institution,  but  was  ultimately  induced,  by  money,  to  take 
a  similar  oath ;  and  the  community  was  confirmed  by  the 
king.  Unluckily  for  himself,  the  bishop  afterwards  annulled 
the  charter  ;  when  the  inhabitants,  in  despair  at  seeing  them- 
selves reduced  to  servitude,  rose  and  murdered  him.  This 
was  in  1112  ;  and  Guibert's  narrative  certainly  does  not  sup- 
port the  opinion  that  charters  of  community  proceeded  from 
the  policy  of  government.  He  seems  to  have  looked  upon 
them  with  the  jealousy  of  a  feudal  abbot,  and  blames  the 
bishop  of  Amiens  for  consenting  to  such  an  establishment  in 
his  city,  from  which,  according  to  Guibert,  many  evils  re- 
sulted. In  his  sermons,  we  are  told,  this  abbot  used  to 
descant  on  "  those  execrable  communities,  where  serfs, 
against  law  and  justice,  withdraw  themselves  from  the  power 
of  their  lords."  2 

In  some  cases  they  were  indebted  for  success  to  their  owu 
courage  and  love  of  liberty.  Oppressed  by  the  exactions  of 
their  superiors,  they  had  recourse,  to  arms,  and  united  them 

^Ordonnances  des  Rois.  ♦.   xi.  preface,         2  Hist.  Litteraire  de  la  France,  t.  x.  448 
p.  18  et  50  Du  Cange,  voc.  Communia. 


252  CAUSES   OF  DECLINE         Chaj  .  11.  Part  II 

selves  in  a  common  league,  confirmed  by  oath,  for  the  sake 
of  redress.  One  of  these  associations  took  place  at  Mans  as 
early  as  1067,  and,  though  it  did  not  produce  any  charter  of 
privileges,  is  a  proof  of  the  spirit  to  which  ultimately  the 
superior  classes  were  obliged  to  submit.1  Several  charters 
bear  witness  that  this  spirit  of  resistance  was  justified  by  op- 
pression. Louis  VII.  frequently  declares  the  tyranny  exer- 
cised over  the  towns  to  be  his  motive  for  enfranchising  them. 
Thus  the  charter  of  Mantes,  in  1150,  is  said  to  be  given 
u  pro  nimia  oppressione  pauperum  :  "  that  of  Compiegne,  in 
1153,  "propter  enormitates  clericorum : "  that  of  Dourlens, 
granted  by  the  count  of  Ponthieu  in  1202,  "propter  injurias 
et  molestias  a  potentibus  terras  burgensibus  frequenter  il- 
latas."  2 

The  privileges  which  these  towns  of  France  derived  from 
The  extent  their  charters  were  surprisingly  extensive  ;  espe- 
of  their  cially  if  we  do  not  suspect  some  of  them  to  be  mere- 
priT  eges.       j^  jn  confirmatjon  0f  previous  usages.     They  were 

made  capable  of  possessing  common  property,  and  authorized 
to  use  a  common  seal  as  the  symbol  of  their  incorporation. 
The  more  oppressive  and  ignominious  tokens  of  subjection, 
ducIi  as  the  fine  paid  to  the  lord  for  permission  to  marry  their 
children,  were  abolished.  Their  payments  of  rent  or  tribute 
were  limited  both  in  amount  and  as  to  the  occasions  when 
they  might  be  demanded  :  and  these  were  levied  by  assessors 
of  their  own  electing.  Some  obtained  an  exemption  from 
assisting  their  lord  in  war ;  others  were  only  bound  to  follow 
him  when  he  personally  commanded ;  and  almost  all  limited 
their  service  to  one,  or,  at  the  utmost,  very  few  days.  If 
they  were  persuaded  to  extend  its  duration,  it  was,  like  that 
of  feudal  tenants,  at  the  cost  of  their  superior.  Their  cus- 
toms, as  to  succession  and  other  matters  of  private  right, 
were  reduced  to  certainty,  and,  for  the  most  part,  laid  down 
in  the  charter  of  incorporation.  And  the  observation  of 
these  was  secured  by  the  most  valuable  privilege  which  the 
chartered  towns  obtained  —  that  of  exemption  from  the  juris- 
diction, as  well  of  the  royal  as  the  territorial  judges.  They 
were  subject  only  to  that  of  magistrates,  either  wholly  elected 
by  themselves,  or,  in  some  places,  with  a  greater  or  less  par- 
ticipation of  choice  in  the   lord.     They  were  empowered  to 

1  Recueil  des  llistoriens,  t.  xiv.  preface         2  Ordou nances  des  Rois,  t.  xi  preiac*. 
P  66.  p.  17. 


Feudal  System.     OF  THE  FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  253 

make  special  rules,  or,  as  we  call  them,  by-laws,  so  as  not  to 
contravene  *he  provisions  of  their  charter,  or  the  ordinanc  s 
of  the  king.1 

It  was  undoubtedly  far  from  the  intention  of  those  baronn 
who  conferred  such  immunities  upon  their  subjects 
to  relinquish  their  own  superiority  and  rights  not  off^  10n 
expressly  conceded.  But  a  remarkable  change  towns.  ^th 
took  place  in  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury, which  affected,  in  a  high  degree,  the  feudal  constitu 
tion  of  France.  Towns,  distrustful  of  their  lord's  fidelity, 
sometimes  called  in  the  king  as  guarantee  of  his  engage- 
ments. The  first  stage  of  royal  interference  led  to  a  more 
extensive  measure.  Philip  Augustus  granted  letters  of  safe- 
guard to  communities  dependent  upon  the  barons,  assuring 
to  them  his  own  protection  and  patronage.2  And  this  was 
followed  up  so  quickly  by  the  court,  if  we  believe  some  wri- 
ters, that  in  the  next  reign  Louis  VI1T.  pretended  to  the  im- 
mediate sovereignty  over  all  chartered  iowns,  in  exclusion 
of  their  original  lords.3  Nothing,  perhaps,  had  so  decisive 
an  effect  in  subverting  the  feudal  aristocracy.  The  barons 
perceived,  too  late,  that,  for  a  price  long  since  lavished  in 
prodigal  magnificence  or  useless  warfare,  they  had  suffered 
the  source  of  their  wealth  to  be  diverted,  and  the  nerves  of 
their  strength  to  be  severed.  The  government  prudently 
respected  the  privileges  secured  by  charter.  Philip  the 
Long  established  an  officer  in  all  large  towns  to  preserve 
peace  by  an  armed  police  ;  but  though  subject  to  the  orders 
of  the  crown,  he  was  elected  by  the  burgesses,  and  they  took 
a  mutual  oath  of  fidelity  to  each  other.  Thus  shielded  under 
the  king's  mantle,  they  ventured  to  encroach  upon  the  neigh- 
boring lords,  and  to  retaliate  for  the  long  oppression  of  the 
commonalty.4     Every  citizen  was  bound  by  oath  to  stand  by 

1  Ordonnances  dea  Mois,  prefaces  aux  manoir,  however,  sixty  years  afterwards, 
tomes  xi.  et  xii  ;  Du  Cange,  voc.  Com-  lays  it  down  that  no  one  can  erect  « 
omnia,  Hostis  ;  Carpentier,  Suppl.  ad  Du  commune  without  the  kind's  consent, 
Cange,  v.  Host  is  ;  Mably,  Observations  c.  50.  p.  268.  And  this  was  an  unques- 
Bur  l'llist.  de  France,  1.  hi.  c.  7-  tionable  maxim  in  the  fourteenth  cen- 

2  Mably,   Observations    sur  l'Hist.    de  tury. — Ordonnances,  t.  xi.  p.  29. 
France,  i.  hi.  c.  7.  4  In  the  charter  of  Philip  Augustus  to 

3  Reputabat  civitates  omnes  suas  esse,  the  town  of  Roye  in  Picardy,  we  read, 
in  quibus  communing  essent.  I  mention  Tf  anj  Btranger,  whether  noble  or  villein, 
this  in  deference  to  Du  Cange,  Mably,  commits  a  wrODg  against  the  town,  the 
and  others,  who  assume  the  fact  as  in-  mayor  shall  summon  him  to  answer  for 
controvertible  ;  but  the  passage  is  only  it,  and  if  he  does  not  obey  the  summons 
in  a  monkish  chronicler,  whose  authority,  the  mayor  and  inhabitants  may  go  and 
were  it  even  more  explicit,  would  not  destroy  his  house,  in  which  we  (the  king) 
weigh  much  in  a  matter  of  law      Beau-  will  lend  them  our  assistance,  if  the  hous* 


25 1  CAUSES   OF  DECLINE        Chap.  II.  Part  II. 

the  common  cause  against  all  aggressors,  and  tliis  obligation 
was  abundantly  fulfilled.  In  order  to  swell  their  numbers, 
it  became  the  practice  to  admit  all  who  came  to  reside  with 
in  their  walls  to  the  rights  of  burgher-hip,  even  though  they 
were  villeins  appurtenant  to  the  soil  of  a  master  from  whom 
they  had  escaped.1  Others,  having  obtained  the  same  privi- 
leges, continued  to  dwell  in  the  country  ;  but,  upon  any  dis- 
pute with  their  lords,  called  in  the  assistance  of  their 
community.  Philip  the  Fair,  erecting  certain  commune-  in 
Languedoc,  gave  to  any  who  would  declare  on  oath  that  he 
was  aggrieved  by  the  lord  or  his  officers  the  right  of  being 
admitted  a  burgess  of  the  next  town,  upon  paying  one  mark 
of  silver  to  the  king,  and  purchasing  a  tenement  of  a  defi- 
nite value.  But  the  neglect  of  this  condition  and  several 
other  abuses  are  enumerated  in  an  instrument  of  Charles 
V.,  containing  the  complaints  made  by  the  nobility  and  rich 
ecclesiastics  of  the  neighborhood.2  In  his  reign  the  feudal 
independence  had  so  completely  yielded,  that  the  court  be- 
gan to  give,  in  to  a  new  policy,  which  was  ever  after  pur- 
sued ;  that  of  maintaining  the  dignity  and  privileges  of  the 
noble  class  against  those  attacks  which  wealth  and  liberty 
encouraged  the  plebeians  to  make  upon  them. 
„   . .  The  maritime   towns  of  the  south   of  France 

Maritime  ,   .     .  ,,.  .  ,     n 

towns  entered  into  separate  alliances  with  foreign  states  ; 
ESe^tent  as  ^Tarbonne  wiln  Genoa  in  1166,  and  Montpel- 
lier  in  the  next  century.  At  the  death  of  Ray- 
be  too  strong  for  the  burgesses  to  pull  guedoc,  t.  iii.  p.  115.  The  territory  of 
down:  except  the  case  of  one  of  our  commune  was  called  Pax  (p.  185);  ar 
vassals,   whose   house   shall    not  be   de-  expressive  word. 

stroyed;  but  he  shall  not  be  allowed  to  i  One  of  the  most   remarkable   privi 

euter  the  town  till  he  has  made  amends  leges  of  chartered  towns  was  that  of  con 

at  the  discretion  of  the  mayor  and  jurats,  ferring  freedom  on  runaway  serfs,  if  they 

Ordonnances  des  Rois,  t.  xi.  p.  228.     This  were  not  reclaimed  by  their  masters  with- 

sunimary  process  could  only,  as  I  con-  in  a  certain    time.     This  was   a  pretty 

ceive,  be  employed  if  the  house  was  situ-  general  law.     Si  quis  nativus  quiete  per 

ated  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  com-  unum  annum  et  unum  diem  in  aliqua 

mune.     See  Charter  of  Crespy,  id.  p.  253.  villa  privilegiata  manserit,    ita  quod  in 

In  other  cases  the  application  for  redress  eorum  communem  gyldam  tanuuam  civis 

was  to  be  made  in  the  first  instance  to  receptus  fuerit,  eo  ipso  a  villenagio  libe- 

the  lord  of  the  territory  wherein  the  de-  rabitur.     Glanvil,  1.  v.  c.  5      The  cities 

linquent  resided.     But  upon  his  failing:  of  Languedoc   had   the  same   privilege, 

to  enforce   satisfaction,  the  mayor   and  Vaissette,   t.  iii.   p.  528.  530.     And  the 

jurats  might  satisfy   themselves  ;  liceat  editor  of  the  Ordonnances  speaks  of  it  as 

justitiani  quaerere,  prout  poterunt ;  that  general,  p.  44.     A   similar   custom    was 

Is.  might  pull  down  his  house  provided  established  in  Germany  ;  but  the  term 

they  could.     Mably  positively  maintains  of  prescription   was,   in    some  places  at 

the  communes  to  have  had  the  right  of  least,  much    longer  than  a  year  aud  a 

levying  war.  1.  iii.  c.  7.     And  Brequigny  da]  ,  Pfeffel,  t.  i.  p.  294. 

leems  to  coincide  with  him.     Ordonnan-  -  Marteune,   Thesaur.     Anecd.  t.  i    p. 

**e,  preface,  p.  16 ;  see  also  Hist,  de  Lan-  1515. 


Feudal  System.      OF  THE  FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  255 

oaond  VII.,  Avignon,  Aries,  and  Marseilles  affected  to  set  up 
republican  governments;  but  they  were  soon  brought  into 
subjection.1  The  independent  character  of  maritime  towns 
was  not  peculiar  to  those  of  the  southern  provinces.  Ed- 
ward II.  and  Edward  III.  negotiated  and  entered  into  alli- 
ances with  the  towns  of  Flanders,  to  which  neither  their  count 
nor  the  king  of  France  were  parties.2  Even  so  late  as  the 
rei«-n  of  Louis  XL  the  duke  of  Burgundy  did  not  hesitate  to 
address  the  citizens  of  Rouen,  in  consequence  ot  the  capture 
of  some  ships,  as  if  they  had  formed  an  independent  staie.9 
This  evidently  arose  out  of  the  ancient  customs  of  private 
warfare,  which,  long  after  they  were  repressed  by  a  stricter 
police  at  home,  continued  with  lawless  violence  on  the  ocean, 
and  gave  a  character  of  piracy  to  the  commercial  enterprise 
of  the  middle  ages. 

Notwithstanding  the  forces  which  in  opposite   directions 
assailed  the  feudal  sy.-tem  from  the  enhancement  ftIilitary 
of   roval  prerogative,    and    the   elevation  of  the  service  ot 

j         t  o  feudal 

chartered  towns,  its  resistance  would  have  been  tenants 
much  longer,  but  for  an  intrinsic  decay.  No  po-  for^money 
litical  institution  can  endure  which  does  not  rivet 
itself  to  the  hearts  of  men  by  ancient  prejudice  or  acknowh 
edged  interest.  The  feudal  compact  had  originally  much  of 
this  character.  Its  principle  of  vitality  was  warm  and  ac- 
tive. In  fulfilling  the  obligations  of  mutual  assistance  and 
fidelity  by  military  service,  the  energies  of  friendship  were 
awakened,  and  the  ties  of  moral  sympathy  superadded 
to  those  of  positive  compact.  While  private  wars  were  at 
their  height,  the  connection  of  lord  and  vassal  grew  close  and 
cordial,  in  proportion  to  the  keenness  of  their  enmity  towards 
others.  It  was  not  the  object  of  a  baron  to  disgust  and  im- 
poverish his  vavassors  by  enhancing  the  profits  of  seigniory  ; 
for  there  was  no  rent  of  such  price  as  blood,  nor  any  labor 
so  serviceable  as  that  of  the  sword. 

But  the  nature  of  feudal  obligation  was  far  better  adapted 
to  the  partial  quarrels  of  neighboring  lords  than  to  the  wars 
of  kingdoms.  Customs,  founded  upon  the  poverty  of  the 
smaller  gentry,  had  limited  their  martial  duties  to  a  period 
never  exceeding  forty  days,  and  diminished  according  to  the 
subdivisions  of  the  fief.     They  could  undertake  an  expedi 

i  Velly,  t.  iv.  p.  446,  t.  v.  p.  97  3  Gamier,  t.  xrii.  p.  896 

*  Rymer,  t.  iv.  passim 


256  CAUSES   OF  DECLINE        Chai-.  II.  Part  II 

tion,  but  not  a  campaign ;  they  could  burn  an  open  town,  but 
had  seldom  leisure  to  besiege  a  fortress.  Hence,  when  the 
kings  of  France  and  England  were  engaged  in  wars  which, 
on  our  side  at  least,  might  be  termed  national,  the  inefficiency 
of  the  feudal  militia  became  evident.  It  was  not  easy  to 
employ  the  military  tenants  of  England  upon  the  frontiers 
of  Normandy  and  the  Isle  of  France,  within  the  limits  of 
their  term  of  service.  When,  under  Henry  II.  and  Richard 
I.,  the  scene  of  war  was  frequently  transferred  to  the  Ga- 
ronne or  the  Charente,  this  was  still  more  impracticable. 
The  first  remedy  to  which  sovereigns  had  recourse  was  to 
keep  their  vassals  in  service  after  the  expiration  of  their 
forty  days,  at  a  stipulated  rate  of  pay.1  But  this  was 
frequently  neither  convenient  to  the  tenant,  anxious  to 
return  back  to  his  household,  nor  to  the  king,  who  could  not 
readily  defray  the  charges  of  an  army.2  Something  was  to 
be  devised  more  adequate  to  the  exigency,  though  less  suita- 
ble to  the  feudal  spirit.  By  the  feudal  law  the  fief  was,  in 
strictness,  forfeited  by  neglect  of  attendance  upon  the  lord's 
expedition.  A  milder  usage  introduced  a  fine,  which,  how- 
ever, was  generally  rather  heavy,  and  assessed  at  discretion. 
An  instance  of  this  kind  has  been  noticed  in  an  earlier  part 
of  the  present  chapter,  from  the  muster-roll  of  Philip  the 
Bold's  expedition  against  the  count  de  Foix.  The  first  Nor- 
man kings  of  England  made  these  amercements  very  oppres- 
sive. But  when  a  pecuniary  payment  became  the  regular 
course  of  redeeming  personal  service,  which,  under  the  name 
of  escuage,  may  be  referred  to  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  it 
was  essential  to  liberty  that  the  military  tenant  should  not 
lie  at  the  mercy  of  the  crown.8  Accordingly,  one  of  the 
most  important  provisions  contained  in  the  Magna  Charta  of 
John  secures  the  assessment  of  escuage  in  parliament.  This 
is  not  renewed  in  the  charter  of  Henry  III.,  but  the  practice 
during  his  reign  was  conformable  to  its  spirit. 

The  feudal  military  tenures   had   superseded  that  earlier 

l  Du  Cange.  et  Carpentier,  voc.  Hostis.  guedoc.     At   that    of   Angers,   in   1230, 

a  There    are    several    instances   where  nearly    the   same   thing  occurred.  —  M. 

armies   broke   up,  at  the  expiration  of  Paris,  p.  308. 

their  limited  term  of  service,  in  conse-  3  Madox,   Hist,   of  Exchequer,   c.  16, 

quence  of  disagreement  with  the  sover-  conceives    that  escuage   may  have  been 

eign.     Thus,  at  the  siege  of  Avignon  in  levied  by  Henry  I.;    the  earliest  mention 

1226,  Theobald  count  of  Champagne  re-  of   it.   however,  in  a   record,   is   under 

tired  with  his  troops,  that  he  might  not  Henry  II.  in  1159 — Lvttelton's  Hist   of 

promote  the   king's  designs  upon  Lan-  Henry  11.  \o.    iv.  p.  13 


Fkdpal  St*tem.      OF  THE  FEUDAL   SYSTEM. 


257 


system  of  public  defence  which  called  upon  every  man,  and 
especially  ever)-  landholder,  to  protect  his  country.1  The 
relations  of  a  vassal  came  in  place  of  those  of  a  subject  and 
a  citizen.  This  was  the  revolution  of  the  ninth  century.  In 
the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  another  innovation  rather  more 
gradually  prevailed,  and  marks  the  third  period  in  v     . 

i  •]•  i  •  c-  t->  ~\t  Employment 

the  military  history  ot  .hurope.  Mercenary  troops  of  mercenaiy 
were  substituted  for  the  feudal  militia.  Undoubt-  troops" 
edly  there  could  never  have  been  a  time  when  valor  was  no', 
to  be  purchased  with  money  ;  nor  could  any  employment  of 
surplus  wealth  be  more  natural  either  to  the  ambitious  or  the 
weak.  But  we  cannot  expect  to  find  numerous  testimonies 
of  facts  of  this  description.2  In  public  national  history  I  am 
aware  of  no  instance  of  what  may  be  called  a  regular  army 
more  ancient  than  the  body-guards,  or  huscarles,  of  Canute 
the  Great.  These  select  troops  amounted  to  six  thousand  men, 
on  whom  he  probably  relied  to  ensure  the  subjection  of  Eng- 


1  Every  citizen,  however  extensive 
may  be  his  privileges,  is  naturally  bound 
to  repel  invasion.  A  common  rising  of 
the  people  in  arms,  though  not  always 
the  most  convenient  mode  of  resistance, 
is  one  to  which  all  governments  have  a 
right  to  resort.  Volumus,  says  Charles 
the  Bald,  ut  cujuscunque  nostrum  homo, 
in  cujuscunque  regno  sit,  cum  seniore 
suo  in  hostem,  vel  aliis  suis  utilitatibus 
pergat ;  nisi  talis  regni  invasio,  quam 
Lantweri  dicunt  (quod  absit),  acciderit 
ut  omnis  populus  illius  regni  ad  earn  re- 
pellendam  communiter  pergat.  Baluzii 
Capitularia,  t.  ii.  p.  44.  This  very  ancient 
mention  of  the  Lantfwekr,  or  insurrec- 
tional militia,  so  signally  called  forth  in 
the  present  age,  will  strike  the  reader. 

The  obligation  of  bearing  arms  in  de- 
fensive warfare  was  peculiarly  incumbent 
on  the  freeholder  or  alodialist.  It  made 
part  of  the  trinoda  necessitas,  in  Eng- 
land, erroneously  confounded  by  some 
writers  with  a  feudal  military  tenure. 
But  when  these  latter  tenures  became 
nearly  universal,  the  original  principles 
of  public  defence  were  almost  obliterated, 
and  I  know  not  how  far  alodial  proprie- 
tors, where  they  existed,  were  called  upon 
for  service.  Kings  did  not.  however,  al- 
ways dispense  with  such  aid  as  the  lower 
people  could  supply.  Louis  the  Fat  call- 
ed out  the  militia  of  towns  and  parishes 
under  their  priests,  who  marched  at  their 
head,  though  they  did  not  actually  com- 
mand them  in  battle.  In  the  charters  of 
incorporation  which  towns  received  the 
number  of  troops  required  was  usually 
VOL.  I    —  M.  17 


expressed.  These  formed  the  infantry  of 
the  French  armies,  perhaps  more  numer- 
ous than  formidable  to  an  enemy.  In 
the  war  of  the  same  prince  with  the  em- 
peror Henry  V.  all  the  population  of  the 
frontier  provinces  was  called  out  ;  for  the 
militia  of  the  counties  of  Rheims  and 
Chalons  is  said  to  have  amounted  to 
sixty  thousand  men.  Philip  IV.  sum- 
moned one  foot-soldier  for  every  twenty 
hearths  to  take  the  field  after  the  battle 
of  Courtrai.  (Daniel.  Hist,  de  la  Mi  lice 
Franchise  ;  Veily,  t.  hi.  p.  62,  t.  vii.  p. 
287.)  Commissions  of  array,  either  to 
call  out  the  whole  population,  or,  as  wa? 
more  common,  to  select  the  most  service 
able  by  forced  impressment,  occur  in 
English  records  from  the  reign  of  Edward 
I.  (Stuart's  View  of  Society,  p.  400) ;  and 
there  are  even  several  writs  directed  to 
the  bishops,  enjoiuing  them  to  cause  all 
ecclesiastical  persons  to  be  arrayed  and 
armed  on  account  of  an  expected  in- 
vasion.—  Rymer,  t.  vi.  p.  726  (46  E.  III.), 
t.  vii.  p.  162  (1  R.  II.),  and  t.  viii.  p.  270 
(3H.  IV.) 

2  The  preface  to  the  eleventh  volume 
of  Recueil  des  Historiens,  p.  232,  notices 
the  word  solidarii,  for  hired  soldiers,  as 
early  as  1030.  It  was  probably  unusual 
at  that  time;  though  in  Koger  Hoveden, 
Ordericus  Vitalis,  and  other  writers  of 
the  twelfth  century,  it  occurs  not  very 
{infrequently.  We  may  perhaps  conjec- 
ture the  abbots,  as  both  the  richest  and 
the  most  defenceless,  to  have  been  the 
first  who  availed  themselves  of  merce- 
nary valor. 


258  CAUSES   OF   DECLINE       Chap.  II.  Pakt  II 

land.  A  code  of  martial  law  compiled  for  their  regulation  is 
extant  in  substance  ;  and  they  are  reported  to  have  displayed 
a  military  spiril  of  mutual  union,  of  which  their  master  stood 
in  awe.1  Harold  II.  is  also  said  to  have  had  Danish  soldiers 
in  pay.  But  the  most  eminent  example  of  a  mercenary  army 
is  that  by  whose  assistance  William  achieved  the  conquest 
of  England.  Historians  concur  in  representing  this  force  to 
have  consisted  of  sixty  thousand  men.  He  afterwards  hired 
soldiers  from  various  regions  to  resist  an  invasion  from 
Norway.  William  Rufus  pursued  the  same  course.  Hired 
troops  did  not,  however,  in  general  form  a  considerable 
portion  of  armies  till  the  wars  of  Henry  II.  and  Philip 
Augustus.  Each  of  these  monarchs  took  into  pay  large 
bodies  of  mercenaries,  chiefly,  as  we  may  infer  from  their 
appellation  of  Brabancons,  enlisted  from  the  Netherlands. 
These  were  always  disbanded  on  cessation  of  hostilities ;  and, 
unfit  for  any  habits  but  of  idleness  and  license,  oppressed 
the  peasantry  and  ravaged  the  country  without  control.  But 
their  soldier-like  principles  of  indiscriminate  obedience,  still 
more  than  their  courage  and  field-discipline,  rendered  them 
dear  to  kings,  who  dreaded  the  free  spirit  of  a  feudal  army 
It  was  by  such  a  foreign  force  that  John  saw  himself  on  the 
point  of  abrogating  the  Great  Charter,  and  reduced  his 
barons  to  the  necessity  of  tendering  his  kingdom  to  a  prince 
of  France.2 

It  now  became  manifest  that  the  probabilities  of  war 
inclined  to  the  party  who  could  take  the  field  with  selected 
and  experienced  soldiers.  The  command  of  money  was  the 
command  of  armed  hirelings,  more  sure  and  steady  in  battle,  as 

1  For  these  facts,  of  which  I  remember  They  were  distinguished   by  their  drtss 
no  mention  in  English  history,  I  am  in-  and  golden  ornaments.     Their  manners 
debted  to  the  Danish  collection  of  Lan-  towards  each  other  were  regulated ;  quar- 
gebek,    Scriptores     Rerun)    Danicarum  relfl  and  abusive   words  subjected   to  a 
\Iedii  2Evi.  Though  the  Leges  Castrensis  penalty.     All  disputes,  even   respecting 
Januti  Magni,  published    by  him,  t.  hi.  lands,  were  settled  among  themselves  at 
p.  141,  are  not  in  their  original  statutory  their  general   parliament.      A   Bingulai 
form,   they   proceed    from    the   pen   of  story  is  told,  which,  if  false,  in 
Sweno,  the  earliest  Danish  historian,  who  illustrate  the    traditionary  character  of 
Kred  under  Waldemar  T.,   less  than  a  these  guards :  that,  Canute  having  killed 
c  _<ntury  and  a  half  after  Canute.    I  ap-  one  of   their  body  in  a  tit  of  anger,  it 
ply  the  word  huscarle,  familiar  in  Anglo-  was  debated  whether  the  king  should  in- 
Saxon  documents,  to  these  military  re-  cur  the  legal  penalty  of  death  ;  and  this 
tainers,  on  the  authority  of  Langebek,  in  was  onlj  compromised  by  his  kueeling 
another  place,  t.  ii.  p.  454.     The  object  of  on  a  cushion  before  the  assembly,  and 
Canute's  institutions  was  to  pro  luce  an  awaiting  their  permission  to  rise.    T  iil 
uniformity    of    discipline  and    conduct  p.  150. 
among  his  soldiers,  and  thus  to  separate        -  Matt   Pans, 
them  more  decidedly  from    the  people. 


Feudal  System.      OF  THE  FEUDAL  SYSTEM.  259 

we  mast  confess  with  shame,  than  the  patriot  citizen.  Though 
the  nobility  still  composed  in  a  great  degree  the  strength  of  an 
army,  yet  they  served  in  a  new  character ;  their  animating 
spirit  was  that  of  chivalry  rather  than  of  feudal  tenure  ;  their 
connection  with  a  superior  was  personal  rather  than  territorial 
The  crusades  had  probably  a  material  tendency  to  effectuate 
this  revolution  by  substituting,  what  was  inevitable  in  those 
expeditions,  a  voluntary  stipendiary  service  for  one  of  abso 
lute  obligation.1  It  is  the  opinion  of  Daniel  that  in  the  thir- 
teenth century  all  feudal  tenants  received  pay,  even  during 
their  prescribed  term  of  service.2  This  does  not  appear  con- 
sonant to  the  law  of  fiefs  ;  yet  their  poverty  may  often  have 
rendered  it  impossible  to  defray  the  cost  of  equipment  on 
distant  expeditions.  A  large  proportion  of  the  expense  must 
in  all  cases  have  fallen  upon  the  lord ;  and  hence  that  per- 
petually increasing  taxation,  the  effects  whereof  we  have 
lately  been  investigating. 

A  feudal  army,  however,  composed  of  all  tenants  in  chief 
and  their  vassals,  still  presented  a  formidable  array.  It  is 
very  long  before  the  paradox  is  generally  admitted  that 
numbers  do  not  necessarily  contribute  to  the  intrinsic  effi- 
ciency of  armies.  Philip  IV.  assembled  a  great  force  by 
publishing  the  arriere-ban,  or  feudal  summons,  for  his  un- 
happy expedition  against  the  Flemings.  A  small  and  more 
disciplined  body  of  troops  would  not,  probably,  have  met 
with  the  discomfiture  of  Courtray.  Edward  I.  and  Edward 
II.  frequently  called  upon  those  who  owed  military  service, 
in  their  invasions  of  Scotland.3  But  in  the  French  wars  of 
Edward  III.  the  whole,  I  think,  of  his  army  served  for  pay, 
and  was  raised  by  contract  with  men  of  rank  and  influence, 
who  received  wages  for  every  soldier  according  to  his  station 
and  the  arms  he  bore.  The  rate  of  pay  was  so  remarkably 
high,  that,  unless  we  imagine  a  vast  profit  to  have  been 
intended  for  the  contractors,  the  private  lancers  and  even 
archers  must   have   been  chiefly  taken  from  the   middling 

l  Joinville,    in   several   passages,   inti-  2  Hist,  de   la  Milice   Franchise,  p.  84. 

mates  that  most  of  the  knights  serving  in  The   use  of  mercenary   troops  prevailed 

St.  Louis's  crusade  received  pay,  either  much  in  Germany  during  the  thirteenth 

from    their  superior  lord,  if  he  were  ou  century.     Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p. 89.    In  Italy 

the  expedition,  or  from  some  other,  into  it   was   also   very   common  ;  though   its 

whose  service  they  entered  for  the  time,  general  adoption  is  to  be  referred  to  the 

He   set   out   himself,  with   ten   knights,  commencement  of  the  succeeding  age. 

whom  he  afterwards  found  it  difficult  3  Etymer,  t.  iii.  p.  173,  189,  199,  et  alibt 

enough    to    maiutain.  —  Collection   des  saepius. 
Memoires,  t.  i.  p.  49,  and  t.  ii.  p.  53 


260  CAUSES   OF  DECLINE       Chat,  li    Pakt  II 

classes,  the  smaller  gentry,  or  rich  yeomanry  of  England. 
This  part  of  Edward's  military  system  was  probably  a  lead- 
ing cause  of  his  superiority  over  the  French,  among  whom 
the  feudal  tenantry  were  called  into  the  field,  and  swelled  their 
Unwieldy  armies  at  Crecy  and  Poitiers.  Both  parties,  how- 
ever, in  this  war  employed  mercenary  troops.  Philip  had 
15,000  Italian  crossbow-men  at  Crecy.  It  had  for  some  time 
before  become  the  trade  of  soldiers  of  fortune  to  enlist  under 
leaders  of  the  same  description  as  themselves  in  companies 
of  adventure,  passing  from  one  service  to  another,  uncon- 
cerned as  to  the  cause  in  which  they  were  retained.  These 
military  adventurers  played  a  more  remarkable  part  in  Italy 
than  in  France,  though  not  a  little  troublesome  to  the  latter 
country.  The  feudal  tenures  had  at  least  furnished  a  loyal 
native  militia,  whose  duties,  though  much  limited  in  the  ex- 
tent, were  defined  by  usage  and  enforced  by  principle.  They 
gave  place,  in  an  evil  hour  for  the  people  and  eventually  for 
sovereigns,  to  contracts  with  mutinous  hirelings,  generally 
strangers,  whose  valor  in  the  day  of  battle  inadequately  re- 
deemed their  bad  faith  and  vexatious  rapacity.  France,  in 
her  calamitous  period  under  Charles  VI.  and  Charles  VII., 
experienced  the  full  effects  of  military  licentiousness.  At  the 
expulsion  of  the  English,  robbery  and  disorder  were  substi- 
tuted for  the  more  specious  plundering  of  war.  Perhaps  few 
Establish-  measures  have  ever  been  more  popular,  as  few 
ment  of  a       certainly  have  been  more  politic,  than  the  estab- 

rcsruliir  •  i  rt 

force  by  lishment  ot  regular  companies  of  troops  by  an  ordi- 
Chariesvu.  nance  of  Charles  VII.  in  1444.2  These  may  justly 
pass  for  the  earliest  institution  of  a  standing  army  in  Europe, 
though  some  Italian  princes  had  retained  troops  constantly  in 
their  pay,  but  prospectively  to  hostilities,  which  were  seldom 

1  Many  proofs  of  this  may  be  adduced  -  The  estates  at  Orleans  in  1439  had 
from  Rymer's  Collection.  The  following  advised  this  measure,  as  is  recited  in  the 
is  from  Brady's  History  of  England,  vol.  preamble  of  the  ordinance.  Ordonnan- 
ii.  Appendix,  p.  86.  The  wages  allowed  ces  des  Rois,  t.  xii.  p.  312.  Sismondi  ob- 
by  contract  in  1346,  were  for  an  earl,  6s.  serves  (vol.  xiii.  p  352)  that  very  little  is 
8'/.  per  day  ;  for  barons  ami  bannerets,  to  be  found  in  historians  about  the  es- 
4s. ;  for  knights,  2s.  ;  for  squires,  Is.  ;  for  tab  lishment  of  these  compagnies  d'or- 
archers  and  hobelera  (light  cavalry),  6d.;  donnance,  though  the  most  important 
for  archers  on  foot,  3'-/ ;  for  Welshmen,  event  in  the  reign  of  Charles  VII.  The 
2<7.  These  sums  multiplied  by  about 24.  old  soldiers  of  fortune  who  pillaged  the 
to  bring  them  on  a  level  with  the  present  country  either  entered  into  these  coin- 
value  of  money  [1818],  will  show  the  pay  panics  or  were  disbanded,  and  after  their 
to  have  been  extremely  high.  The  cav-  dispersion  were  readily  made  amenable 
airy  of  course,  furnished  themselves  to  the  law.  This  writer  is  exceedingly 
with  horses  and  equipments,  as  well  as  full  on  the  subject, 
arms,  which  were  very  expensive.  See 
too  Chap.  I.  p.  77,  of  this  volume. 


Feudal  System.     OF   THE   FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  261 

long  intermitted.  Fifteen  companies  were  composed  each  of 
a  hundred  men  at  arms,  or  lancers  ;  and,  in  the  language  of 
that  age,  the  whole  body  was  one  thousand  five  hundred 
lances.  But  each  lancer  had  three  archers,  a  coutiller,  or 
soldier  armed  with  a  knife,  and  a  page  or  valet  attached  to 
him,  all  serving  on  horseback  —  so  that  the  fifteen  companies 
amounted  to  nine  thousand  cavalry.1  From  these  small  be- 
ginnings, as  they  must  appear  in  modern  times,  arose  the 
regular  army  of  France,  which  every  succeeding  king  was 
solicitous  to  augment.  The  ban  was  sometimes  convoked, 
that  is,  the  possessors  of  fiefs  were  called  upon  for  military 
service,  in  subsequent  ages  ;  but  with  more  of  ostentation  than 
real  efficiency. 

The  feudal  compact,  thus  deprived  of  its  original  efficacy, 
goon  lost  the  respect  and  attachment  which  had  Deca  of 
attended  it.  Homage  and  investiture  became  un-  feudal 
meaning  ceremonies  ;  the  incidents  of  relief  and  prmciPles- 
aid  were  felt  as  burdensome  exactions.  And  indeed  the 
rapacity  with  which  these  were  levied,  especially  by  our 
Norman  sovereigns  and  their  barons,  was  of  itself  sufficient  to 
extinguish  all  the  generous  feelings  of  vassalage.  Thus 
galled,  as  it  were,  by  the  armor  which  he  was  compelled  to 
wear,  but  not  to  use,  the  military  tenant  of  England  looked 
no  longer  with  contempt  upon  the  owner  of  lands  in  socage, 
who  held  his  estate  with  almost  the  immunities  of  an  alodial 
proprietor.  But  the  profits  which  the  crown  reaped  from 
wardships,  and  perhaps  the  prejudices  of  lawyers,  prevented 
the  abolition  of  military  tenures  till  the  restoration  of  Charles 
II.  In  France  the  fiefs  of  noblemen  were  very  unjustly- 
exempted  from  all  territorial  taxation,  though  the  tailles  of 
later  times  had,  strictly  speaking,  only  superseded  the  aids  to 
which  they  had  been  always  liable.  The  distinction,  it  is  well 
known,  was  not  annihilated  till  that  event  which  annihilated 
all  distinctions,  the  French  revolution. 

It  is  remarkable  that,  although  the  feudal  system  established 
in  England  upon  the  Conquest  broke  in  very  much  upon  our 
ancient  Saxon  liberties  —  though  it  was  attended  with  harsher 
servitudes  than  in  any  other  country,  particularly  those  two 
intolerable  burdens,  wardship  and  marriage  —  yet  it  has  in 
general  been  treated  with  more  favor  by  English  than  French 

1  Daniel,  Hist,  de  la  ftlilice  Francaise.   p.  266;  Villaret,  Hist,  de  France,  t.  xv 
p.  394 


262  ADVANTAGES   AND  EVILS       Chap.  II.  Part  II 

writers.  The  hardiness  with  which  the  ancient  barons  re- 
sisted their  .sovereign,  and  the  noble  struggles  which  they 
made  for  civil  liberty,  especially  in  that  Great  Charter,  the 
basement  at  least,  if  not  the  foundation,  of  our  free  constitu- 
tion, have  met  with  a  kindred  sympathy  in  the  bosoms  of 
Englishmen;  while,  from  an  opposite  feeling,  the  French 
have  been  shocked  at  that  aristocratic  independence  which 
cramped  the  prerogatives  and  obscured  the  lustre  of  their 
crown.  Yet  it  is  precisely  to  this  feudal  policy  that  France 
is  indebted  for  that  which  is  ever  dearest  to  her  children, 
their  national  splendor  and  power.  That  kingdom  would 
have  been  irretrievably  dismembered  in  the  tenth  century,  if 
the  laws  of  feudal  dependence  had  not  preserved  its  integrity. 
Empires  of  unwieldy  bulk,  like  that  of  Charlemagne,  have 
several  times  been  dissolved  by  the  usurpation  of  provincial 
governors,  as  is  recorded  both  in  ancient  history  and  in  that 
of  the  Mahometan  dynasties  in  the  East.  What  question  can 
there  be  that  the  powerful  dukes  of  Guienne  or  counts  of 
Toulouse  would  have  thrown  off  all  connection  with  the 
crown  of  France,  when  usurped  by  one  of  their  equals,  if  the 
slight  dependence  of  vassalage  had  not  been  substituted  for 
legitimate  subjection  to  a  sovereign  ? 

It  is  the  previous  state  of  society,  under  the  grandchildren 
of  Charlemagne,  which  we  must  always  keep  in  mind,  if  we 
would  appreciate  the  effects  of  the  feudal  system  upon  the 
welfare  of  mankind.  The  institutions  of  the  eleventh  century 
must  be  compared  with  those  of  the  ninth,  not  with  the  ad- 
vanced civilization  of  modern  times.  If  the  view  that  I  have 
taken  of  those  dark  ages  is  correct,  the  state  of  anarchy 
which  we  usually  term  feudal  was  the  natural  result  of  a  vast 
and  barbarous  empire  feebly  administered,  and  the  cause 
rather  than  effect  of  the  general  establishment  of  feudal  ten- 
ures. These,  by  preserving  the  mutual  relations  of  the  whole, 
kept  alive  the  feeling  of  a  common  country  and  common 
duties,  and  settled,  after  the  lapse  of  ages,  into  the  free  con- 
stitution of  England,  the  firm  monarchy  of  France,  and  the 
federal  union  of  Germany. 

The  utility  of  any  form  of  polity  may  be  estimated  by  its 
effect  upon  national  greatness  and  security,  upon  civil  liberty 
and  private  rights,  upon  the  tranquillity  and  order  of  society,  m 
upon    the    increase    and    diffusion    of   wealth,    or   upon    the 
general  tone  of  moral  sentiment  and  energy.     The  feudal 


Feudal  SrsrEM.       OF  THE  FEUDAL  SYSTEM.  263 

constitution  was  certainly,  as    has  been  observed  General 
already,  little  adapted  for  the  defence  of  a  mighty  on-he** 
kingdom,  far  less  for  schemes  of  conquest.     But  as  advantages 
it  prevailed  alike  in  several  adjacent  countries,  none  resulting 
had  anything  to  fear  from  the  military  superiority  £eU^aihe 
of  its  neighbors.     It  was  this  inefficiency  of  the  system, 
feudal  militia,  perhaps,  that  saved  Europe  during  the  middle 
ages  from  the  danger  of  universal  monarchy.    In  times  when 
princes  had  little  notion  of  confederacies  for  mutual  protec- 
tion, it  is  hard  to  say  what  might  not  have  been  the  successes 
of  an  Otho  the  Great,  a  Frederic  Barbarossa,  or  a  Philip 
Augustus,  if  they  could  have  wielded  the  whole  force  of  their 
subjects  whenever  their  ambition   required.     If  an   empire 
equally  extensive  with  that  of  Charlemagne,  and  sujmorted  by 
military  despotism,  had   been  formed   about   the   twelfth  or 
thirteenth  centuries,  the  seeds  of  commerce  and  liberty,  just 
then  beginning  to  shoot,  would  have  perished,  and  Europe, 
reduced  to  a  barbarous  servitude,  might  have  fallen  before 
the  free  barbarians  of  Tartary. 

If  we  look  at  the  feudal  polity  as  a  scheme  of  civil  free- 
dom, it  bears  a  noble  countenance.  To  the  feudal  law  it  is 
owing  that  the  very  names  of  right  and  privilege  were  not 
swept  away,  as  in  Asia,  by  the  desolating  hand  of  power. 
The  tyranny  which,  on  every  favorable  moment,  was  break 
ing  through  all  barriers,  would  have  rioted  without  control, 
if,  when  the  people  were  poor  and  disunited,  the  nobility  had 
not  been  brave  and  free.  So  far  as  the  sphere  of  feudality 
extended,  it  diffused  the  spirit  of  liberty  and  the  notions  of 
private  right.  Every  one  I  think  will  acknowledge  this  who 
considers  the  limitations  of  the  services  of  vassalage,  so  cau- 
tiously marked  in  those  law-books  which  are  the  records  of 
customs,  the  reciprocity  of  obligation  between  the  lord  and 
his  tenant,  the  consent  required  in  every  measure  of  a  legis- 
lative or  a  general  nature,  the  security,  above  all,  which  every 
vassal  found  in  the  administration  of  justice  by  his  peers,  and 
even  (we  may  in  this  sense  say)  in  the  trial  by  combat.  The 
bulk  of  the  people,  it  is  true,  were  degraded  by  servitude  ; 
but  this  had  no  connection  with  the  feudal  tenures. 

The  peace  and  good  order  of  society  were  not  promoted 
by  this  system.  Though  private  wars  did  not  originate  in 
the  feudal  customs,  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  they  were 
perpetuated   by  so   convenient  an   institution,  which  indeed 


264  ADVANTAGES   AND  EVILS        Chap.  II.  Pakt  H 

owed  its  universal  establishment  to  no  other  cause.  And  as 
predominant  habits  of  warfare  are  totally  irreconcilable  with 
those  of  industry,  not  merely  by  the  immediate  works  erf 
destruction  which  render  its  efforts  unavailing,  but  through 
that  contempt  of  peaceful  occupations  which  they  produce, 
the  feudal  system  must  have  been  intrinsically  adverse  to  the 
accumulation  of  wealth  and  the  improvement  of  those  arts 
which  mitigate  the  evils  or  abridge  the  labors  of  mankind. 

But  as  a  school  of  moral  discipline  the  feudal  institutions 
were  perhaps  most  to  be  valued.  Society  had  sunk,  for  sev- 
eral centuries  after  the  dissolution  of  the  Roman  empire, 
into  a  condition  of  utter  depravity,  where,  if  any  vices  could 
be  selected  as  more  eminently  characteristic  than  others, 
they  were  falsehood,  treachery,  and  ingratitude.  In  slowly 
purging  off  the  lees  of  this  extreme  corruption,  the  feudal 
spirit  exerted  its  ameliorating  influence.  Violation  of  faith 
stood  first  in  the  catalogue  of  crimes,  most  repugnant  to  the 
very  essence  of  a  feudal  tenure,  most  severely  and  promptly 
avenged,  most  branded  by  general  infamy.  The  feudal 
law-books  breathe  throughout  a  spirit  of  honorable  obliga- 
tion. The  feudal  course  of  jurisdiction  promoted,  what  trial 
by  peers  is  peculiarly  calculated  to  promote,  a  keener  feeling 
and  readier  perception  of  moral  as  well  as  of  legal  distinc- 
tions. And  as  the  judgment  and  sympathy  of  mankind  are 
seldom  mistaken,  in  these  great  points  of  veracity  and  justice, 
except  through  the  temporary  success  of  crimes,  or  the  want 
of  a  definite  standard  of  right,  they  gradually  recovered 
themselves  when  law  precluded  the  one  and  supplied  the 
other.  In  the  reciprocal  services  of  lord  and  vassal  there 
was  ample  scope  for  every  magnanimous  and  disinterested 
energy.  The  heart  of  man,  when  placed  in  circumstances 
which  have  a  tendency  to  excite  them,  will  seldom  be  defi- 
cient in  such  sentiments.  No  occasions  could  be  more  favora- 
ble than  the  protection  of  a  faithful  supporter,  or  the  defence 
of  a  beneficent  suzerain,  against  such  powerful  aggression  as 
left  little  prospect  except  of  sharing  hi  his  ruin. 

From  these  feelings  engendered  by  the  feudal  relation  has 
sprung  up  the  peculiar  sentiment  of  personal  reverence 
and  attachment  towards  a  sovereign  which  we  denominate 
loyalty;  alike  distinguishable  from  the  stupid  devotion  of 
Eastern  slaves,  and  from  the  abstract  respect  with  which  free 
citizens  regard  their  chief  magistrate.     Men  who  had  been 


F«udai.  System.      OF   THE  FEUDAL   SYSTEM.  266 

used  to  swear  fealty,  to  profess  subjection,  to  follow,  at  home 
and  in  the  field,  a  feudal  superior  and  his  family,  easily 
transferred  the  same  allegiance  to  the  monarch.  It  was  a 
very  powerful  feeling  which  could  make  the  bravest  men 
put  up  with  slight-  and  ill-treatment  at  the  hands  of  their 
sovereign  ;  or  call  forth  all  the  energies  of  disinterested 
exertion  for  one  whom  they  never  saw,  and  in  whose  char- 
acter there  was  nothing  to  esteem.  In  ages  when  the  rights 
of  the  community  were  unfelt  this  sentiment  was  one  great 
preservative  of  society  ;  and,  though  collateral  or  even  sub- 
servient to  more  enlarged  principles,  it  is  still  indispensable 
to  the  tranquillity  and  permanence  of  every  monarchy.  In  a 
moral  view  loyalty  has  scarcely  perhaps  less  tendency  to 
refine  and  elevate  the  heart  than  patriotism  itself;  and  hold:? 
a  middle  place  in  the  scale  of  human  motives,  as  they  ascend 
from  the  grosser  inducements  of  self-interest  to  the  further- 
mce  of  general  happiness  and  conformity  to  the  purposes  of 
Infinite  Wisdom. 


26(5  STATE  OF  ANCIENT  GERMANY.  Notes  tl 


NOTES  TO   CHAPTER  II. 


Note  I.     Page  149. 

It  is  almost  of  course  with  the  investigators  of  Teutonic 
antiquities  to  rely  with  absolute  confidence  on  the  authority 
of  Tacitus,  in  his  treatise  '  De  Moribus  Germanorum.'  And 
it  is  indeed  a  noble  piece  of  eloquence  —  a  picture  of  man- 
ners so  boldly  drawn,  and,  what  is  more  to  the  purpose,  so 
probable  in  all  its  leading  characteristics,  that  we  never  hesi- 
tate, in  reading,  to  believe.  It  is  only  when  we  have  closed 
the  book  that  a  question  may  occur  to  our  minds,  whether 
the  Roman  writer,  who  had  never  crossed  the  Rhine,  was 
altogether  a  sufficient  witness  for  the  internal  history,  the 
social  institutions,  of  a  people  so  remote  and  so  dissimilar. 
But  though  the  sources  of  his  information  do  not  appear,  it 
is  manifest  that  they  were  copious.  His  geographical  details 
are  minute,  distinct,  and  generally  accurate.  Perhaps  in  no 
instance  have  his  representations  of  ancient  Germany  been 
falsified  by  direct  testimony,  if  in  a  few  circumstances  there 
may  be  reason  to  suspect  their  exact  faithfulness. 

In  the  very  slight  mention  of  German  institutions  which 
I  have  made  in  the  text  there  can  be  nothing  to  excite  doubt. 
They  are  what  Tacitus  might  easily  learn,  and  what,  in  fact, 
we  find  confirmed  by  other  writers.  But  when  he  comes  to 
a  more  exact  description  of  the  social  constitution,  and  of 
the  different  orders  of  men,  it  may  not  be  unreasonable  to 
receive  his  testimony  with  a  less  unhesitating  assent  than  has 
commonly  been  accorded  to  it.  A  sentence,  a  word  of 
Tacitus  has  passed  for  conclusive ;  and  no  theory  which  they 
contradict  would  be  admitted.  A  modern  writer,  however, 
has  justly  pointed  out  that  his  informers  might  easily  be 
deceived  about  the  social  institutions  of  the  tribes  beyond 
the  Rhine ;  and,  in  fact,  it  is  not  on  Tacitus  himself,  but  on 
these  unknown  authorities,  that  we  rely  for  the  fidelity  of 
his  representations.     We  may  readily  conceive,  by  our  own 


Oh^p.  n.  STATE  OF  ANCIENT   GEKMANY.  267 

experience,  the  difficulty  of  obtaining  a  clear  and  exac*. 
knowledge  of  laws,  customs,  and  manners  for  which  we  have 
no  corresponding  analogies.  "  Let  us,"  says  Luden  to  his 
countrymen,  "  ask  an  enlightened  Englishman  who  speaks 
German  concerning  the  political  institutions  of  his  country, 
and  it  will  be  surprising  how  little  we  shall  understand  from 
him.  Ask  him  to  explain  what  is  a  freeman,  a  freeholder,  a 
copyholder,  or  a  yeoman,  and  we  shall  find  how  hard  it  is  to 
make  national  institutions  and  relations  intelligible  to  a  for- 
eigner." (Luden,  Geschichte  des  Deutschen  Volkes,  vol.  i. 
p.  702.) 

This  is  of  course  not  designed  to  undervalue  the  excellent 
work  of  Tacitus,  to  which  almost  exclusively  we  are  indebted 
for  any  acquaintance  with  the  progenitors  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxons  and  the  Franks,  but  to  point  out  a  general  principle, 
which  may  be  far  better  applied  to  inferior  writers,  that  they 
give  a  color  of  their  own  country  to  their  descriptions  of 
foreign  manners,  and  especially  by  the  adoption  of  names  only 
analogically  appropriate.  Thus  the  words  servus,  libertinus. 
ingenuus,  nobilis,  are  not  necessarily  to  be  understood  in  a 
Roman  sense  when  Tacitus  employs  them  in  his  treatise  on 
Germany.  Servus  is  in  Latin  a  slave ;  but  the  German 
described  by  him  under  that  name  is  the  lidus,  subject  to  a 
lord,  and  liable  to  payments,  but  not  without  limit,  as  he 
himself  explains.  "  Frumenti  modum  dominus,  aut  pecoris, 
aut  vestis,  ut  colono,  imperat ;  et  servus  hactenus  paret." 
Here  colonus,  in  the  age  of  Tacitus,  was  as  much  a  wrong 
word  in  one  direction  as  servus  was  in  another.  For  we 
believe  that  the  colonus  of  early  Rome  was  a  tenant,  or 
farmer,  yielding  rent,  but  absolutely  a  free  man ; *  though  in 
the  third  century,  after  barbarians  had  been  settled  on  lands 
in  the  empire,  we  find  it  applied  to  a  semi-servile  condition 
It  is  more  worthy  to  be  observed  that  his  account  of  the 
kingly  office  among  the  Germans  is  not  quite  consistent 
Sometimes  it  appears  as  if  peculiar  to  certain  tribes,  "  iia 
gentibus  qiue  regnantur  "  (c.  25)  ;  and  here  he  seems  to  speak 
of  the  power  as  very  great,  opposing  it  to  liberty  ;  while  at 
other  times  we  are  led  to  suppose  an  aristocratic  senate  and 
an  ultimate  right  of  decision  in  the  people  at  large,  with  a 
very  limited  sovereign  at  the  head  (c.  7,  11,  &c).  This 
triple  constitution  has  been  taken  by  Montesquieu  for  the 

1  Vidf  Faecioliti  Lexicon. 


268  PARTITION   OF   CONQUERED   LANDS.        Notm  tc 

foundation  of  our  own  in  the  well-known  words  —  "  Ce  beau 
systeme  a  ete  trouve  dans  les  bois." 

Note  II.     Page  150. 

It  is  not  easy  to  explain  these  partitions  made  by  the  bar- 
barous nations  on  their  settlement  in  the  empire ;  and,  what 
would  be  still  more  remarkable  if  historians  were  not  so 
defective  in  that  age,  we  find  no  mention  of  such  partitions 
in  any  records,  excepting  their  own  laws  and  a  few  docu- 
ments of  the  same  class.  Montesquieu  says,  "  Ces  deux  tiers 
netaient  pas  que  dans  certains  quartiers  qu'on  leur  assigna." 
(1.  30,  c.  8).  Troja  seems  to  hold  the  same  opinion  as  to 
the  first  settlement  of  the  Burgundians  in  Gaul,  but  admits  a 
general  division  in  471  :  Storia  d'ltalia  nel  medio  evo  (iii. 
1293).  It  is  indeed  impossible  to  get  over  the  proof  of  such 
a  partition,  or  at  least  one  founded  on  a  general  law,  arising 
from  the  fifty-fourth  section  of  the  Burgundian  code  :  "  Eodem 
tempore  quo  populus  noster  mancipiorum  tertiam,  et  duas 
terrarum  partes  accepit."  This  code  was  promulgated  by 
Gundobald  early  in  the  sixth  century.  It  contains  several 
provisions  protecting  the  Roman  in  the  possession  of  his 
third  against  any  encroachment  of  the  hospes,  a  word  applied 
indifferently  to  both  parties,  as  in  common  Latin,  to  host  and 
guest. 

The  word  sortes,  which  occurs  both  with  the  Burgundians 
and  Visigoths,  has  often  been  referred  to  the  general  parti- 
tion, on  the  hypothesis  that  the  lands  had  been  distributed  by 
lot.  This  perhaps  has  no  evidence  except  the  erroneous 
inference  from  the  word  sors,  but  it  is  not  wholly  improbable. 
Savigny,  indeed,  observes  that  both  the  barbarian  and  the 
Roman  estates  were  called  sortes,  referring  to  Leges  Visi- 
gothorum,  lib.  x.  tit.  2, 1.  1,  where  we  find,  in  some  editions, 
"sortes  Gothic*  vel  Romanic;"  but  all  the  manuscripts, 
according  to  Bouquet,  read  u  sortes  Gothic*  et  tertia  Roman- 
orum,"  which,  of  course,  gives  a  contrary  sense.  (Rec.  des 
Hist.  iv.  430).1     It  seems,  from  some  texts  of  the  Burgun- 

*  Procopius  -ays,  of  the  division  made  an'  avrov  KTjjpoi  Bavdi?,o)V  ol  aypol 

by  Genseric  in  Italy,  Aijdva^  TOVg  uX-  0;-Ol  gf  T6fe  Ka2.ovVTCU  TOV  xpuw- 

Tung   a<pd?j?ro   filv   rove   aypov^,   ol  #     .  _  Ka\  Tu  ^EV  XUp'f.a  ^vfi-avm  baa 

rr?£Zo~Toi  re  i,cav  /cat  apioToi,  kg  6i  T0,f  Te  ^alai  kcll  rots  aA/Mtq  Bavdl- 

d  tuv  Bav6l?Mv  diiveifiev  t&vog  ■  nal  ^oic  Ti&pixoc  rrapaSedux^,  ovdefuai, 


Chap.  II.         PARTITION   OF  CONQUERED  LANDS.  26£ 

dian  law,  that  the  whole  territory  was  not  partitioned  at  once ; 
because,  in  a  supplement  to  the  code  not  much  before  520, 
provision  is  made  for  new  settlers,  who  were  to  receive  only 
a  moiety.  "  De  Romanis  hoc  ordinavimus,  ut  non  amplius  a 
Burgundionibus  qui  infra  venerunt,  requiratur,  quam,  ut 
praesens  necessitas  fuerit,  medietas  terne.  Alia  vero  medie- 
tas cum  integritate  mancipiorum  a  Romanis  teneatur;  nee 
exinde  ullam  violentiam  patiantur."  (Leges  Burgundionum, 
Additamentum  Secundum,  c.  11.)  In  this,  as  in  the  whole 
Burgundian  law,  we  perceive  a  tenderness  for  the  Roman 
inhabitant,  and  a  continual  desire  to  place  him,  as  far  as 
possible,  on  an  equal  footing  with  his  new  neighbor.  The 
reason  assigned  for  the  partition  is  necessity ;  the  Burgundian 
must  live.  It  is  true  that  to  assign  him  two  thirds  of  the  land 
strikes  us  as  an  enormous  spoliation.  Montesquieu  supposes 
that  the  barbarian  took  open  and  pasture  lands,  leaving  the 
tilth  to  the  ancient  possessor,  and  that  this  accounts  for  the 
smaller  proportion  of  slaves  which  he  required  (1.  30,  c.  9). 
Sismondi  has  made  a  similar  suggestion.  It  is  dwelt  upon  by 
Troja,  that  the  Lombards,  taking  a  third  of  the  produce  in- 
stead of  a  portion  of  the  lands  themselves,  reduced  all  the 
original  possessors  to  the  rank  of  tributaries.  In  none  of 
the  barbarous  kingdoms  was  the  Roman  of  so  low  a  status  as 
in  theirs.  But  it  maybe  said  that  the  ancient  law  of  nations, 
exercised  by  none  more  unsparingly  than  by  the  Romans 
themselves  in  Italy,  confiscated  the  whole  soil ;  that,  if  the 
Visigoths  and  Burgundians  spared  one  third,  if  the  Franks 
left  some  Roman  possessors,  this  was  an  indulgent  relaxation 
of  their  right.  And  this  would  be  an  excuse  if  we  could  for 
a  moment  look  upon  the  barbarians  as  having  a  just  cause 
of  war.  The  contrary,  however,  is  manifest  in  almost  every 
case. 

M.  Fauriel  thinks  it  probable  that  the  Franks  made,  like 
the  other  barbarians,  a  partition,  more  or  less  regular,  of  the 
Roman  lands  in  northern  France.  (Hist,  de  la  Gaule 
Meridionale,  ii.  34.)  Guizot  takes  a  somewhat  different 
view,  and  conceives  that  each  chief  took  what  best  suited 
him,  and  lived  there  with  his  followers  about  him.     (Civilis 

tyopov  CLTtayuyrjc;  vtcote\ti   EKE^evaev  absolutely  from  the  analogy  of.  Africa  to 

elvai.  —  De  Bello  Vandal.  1.  i.  c.  8.     This  Gaul,  it  is  natural  to  interpret  KlfjpOL 

passage  gives  no  confirmation  to  the  hy-  Bav&AwV  and  sortes  Salicae  in  the  sanu 

pothesis  of  a  partition  by  lot,  but  the  manner 
contrary  ;  and  though  we  cannot  reason 


270  PARTITION    OF   CONQUERED  LANDS.       Notes  to 

en  France,  Lecon  o2.)  But  if  the  Franks  adopted  so  aris- 
tocratic a  division  as  to  throw  the  lands  which  they  occupied 
into  the  hands  of  a  few  proprietors,  they  must  have  gone  on 
very  different  principles  from  the  other  nations,  among  whom 
we  should  infer,  from  their  laws,  a  much  greater  equality  to 
have  been  preserved.  It  seems,  however,  most  probable  on 
the  whole,  considering  the  silence  of  historians  and  laws,  that 
the  Franks  made  no  such  systematic  distribution  of  lands  as 
the  earlier  barbarians.  They  were,  perhaps,  less  numerous, 
and,  being  at  first  less  civilized,  would  feel  more  reluctance 
at  submitting  to  any  fixed  principle  of  appropriation.  That 
they  dispossessed  many  of  the  Roman  owners  on  the  right 
bank  of  the  Loire  cannot  well  be  doubted.  For,  though 
Raynouard,  who  treads  in  the  steps  of  Dubos,  denies  that 
they  took  any  but  fiscal  lands,  which  had  belonged  to  the 
imperial  domains  (Hist,  du  Droit  Municipal,  i.  256),  Franks 
were  surely  as  little  disposed,  and  as  little  able,  to  live  with- 
out lands  as  Burgundians,  and  they  were  a  rougher  people.1 
Yet  both  with  respect  to  them  and  the  other  barbarians  we  may 
observe  that  the  spoliation  was  not  altogether  so  ruinous  as 
would  naturally  be  presumed.  In  consequence  of  the  long 
decline  and  depopulation  of  the  empire,  the  fruit  of  fiscal 
oppression,  of  frequent  invasion,  and  civil  wars,  we  may  add 
also  of  pestilences  and  unfavorable  seasons,  much  land  had 
gone  out  of  cultivation  in  Gaul ;  and  though  the  proportion 
taken  by  the  Goths  and  Burgundians  was  enormous,  they 
probably  occupied,  in  great  measure,  what  the  Roman  pro- 
prietor had  not  the  means  of  tilling. 

This  subject,  after  all,  is  by  no  means  clear  of  embarrass 
ment,  especially  as  regards  the  Visigothic  and  Burgundian 
partitions.  We  are  driven  to  suppose  a  dispersion  of  these 
conquering  nations  among  their  subjects,  each  man  living 
separately  on  his  sors,  contrary  to  the  policy  of  all  invaders ; 
we  are,  apparently,  to  presume  an  equality  of  numbers  be 
tween  the  Roman  possessors  and  the  barbarians,  so  that  each 
should  have  his  own  hospes.  The  latter  hypothesis,  may, 
perhaps,  be  dispensed  with,  or  considerably  modified ;  but  I 
do  not  see  how  to  get  rid  of  the  former. 

1  M.     Lehuerou    supposes     that    the  their  subsequent  acquisitions  would  be 

Franks,  who  served  the  empire  in  Gaul  at  the  expense  of  the  nations  which  they 

under  the  predecessors  of  Clovis.  had  re-  conquered.     (Instit.  Merov.  i.  237,  268.' 

ceived  lands  like  the  Burgundiaus  and  But   the   private  estates   of  the   Franks 

Visigoths:  so  that  they  were  already  in  seem    to   have   been    principally   in   th« 

*  groat  measure  provided  for,  and  that  north  of  France. 


Chap  II.  THE  SALIC  LAW.  271 


Note  III.     Page  152. 

The  Salic  law  exists  in  two  texts ;  one  purely  Latin,  of 
which  there  are  fifteen  manuscripts ;  the  other  mingled  with 
German  words,  of  which  there  are  three.     Most  have  con- 
sidered the  latter  to  be  the  original;  the  manuscripts  con- 
taining it  are  entitled  Lex  Salica  antiquissima,  or  uetustior  ; 
the  others  generally  run,  Lex  Salica  recentior,  or  emendata. 
This  seems  to  create  a  presumption.     But  M.  Wraida,  who 
published   a   history  of  the   Salic   law  in    1808,  inclines   to 
think  the  pure  Latin  older  than  the  other.    M.  Guizot  adopts 
the   same   opinion   (Civilisation  en  France,  Lecon    9).     M. 
Wraida  refers  its  original  enactment  to  the  period  when  the 
Franks  were  still  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine;  that  is,  long 
before  the  reign  of  Clovis.     And  this  seems  an  evident  in° 
ference  from  what  is  said  in  the  prologue  to  the  law,  written 
long   afterwards.      But  of  course   it   cannot  apply  to  those 
passages  which  allude  to  the  Romans  as  subjects,  or  to  Chris- 
tianity.    M.  Guizot  is  of  opinion  that  it  bears  marks  of  an 
age  when  the  Franks  had  long  been  mingled  with  the  Roman 
population.     This  is  consistent  with  its  having  been  revised 
by  the  sons  of  Clovis,  Childebert,  and  Clotaire,  as  is  asserted 
in  the  prologue.     One   manuscript   has   the  words  —  "Hoc 
decretum  est  a  pud  regem  et  principes  ejus,  et  apud  cunctum 
populum  Christianum  qui  infra  regnum  Merwingorum  con- 
sistunt."     Neither  Wraida  nor  Guizot  think  it  older  in  its 
present  text  than  the  seventh  century ;  and  as  Dagobert  I. 
appears  in  the  prologue  as  one  reviser,  we  may  suppose  him 
to  be  the  king  mentioned  in  the  words  just  quoted.     It  is 
to  be  observed,  however,  that  two  later  writers,  M.  Pertz,  in 
"Monumenta   Germanise   Historica,"  and  M.   Pardessus,  in 
"  Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscriptions,"  vol.  xv.  (Nouvelle  Serie), 
have  entered  anew  on  this  discussion,  and  do  not  agree  with 
M.  Wraida,  nor  wholly  with  each  other.     M.  Lehuerou  is 
clearly  of  opinion  that,  in  all  its  substance,  the  Salic  code  ia 
to  be   referred   to   Germany  for  its   birthplace,  and   to  the 
period  of  heather  ism  for  its  date.      (Institutions  Merovin- 
giennes,  p.  83.) 

The  Ripuarian  Franks  Guizot,  with  some  apparent  rea- 
son, takes  for  the  progenitors  of  the  Austrasians ;  the  Salian, 
of   the    Neustrians.     The   former  were  settled  on  the  left 


272  THE  SALIC  LAW.  Notes  *o 


bank  of  the  Rhine,  as  Lceti,  or  defenders  of  the  frontier, 
under  the  empire.  These  tribes  were  united  under  one  gov- 
ernment through  the  assassination  of  Sigebert  at  Cologne,  in 
the  last  years  of  Clovis,  who  assumed  his  crown.  Such  a 
theory  might  tend  to  explain  the  subsequent  rivalry  of  these 
great  portions  of  the  Frank  monarchy,  though  it  is  hardly 
required  for  that  purpose.  The  Ripuarian  code  of  law  is  re- 
ferred by  Guizot  to  the  reign  of  Dagobert ;  Eccard,  however, 
had  conceived  it  to  have  been  compiled  under  Thierry,  the 
eldest  son  of  Clovis.  (Rec.  des.  Hist.  vol.  iv.)  It  may 
still  have  been  revised  by  Dagobert.  "  We  find  in  this," 
says  M.  Guizot,  "  more  of  the  Roman  law,  more  of  the  royal 
and  ecclesiastical  power;  its  provisions  are  more  precise, 
more  extensive,  less  barbarous  ;  it  indicates  a  further  step  in 
the  transition  from  the  German  to  the  Roman  form  of  social 
life."     (Civil,  en  France,  Lecon  10.) 

The  Burgundian  law,  though  earlier  than  either  of  these 
in  their  recensions,  displays  a  far  more  advanced  state  of 
manners.  The  Burgundian  and  Roman  are  placed  on  the 
same  footing ;  more  is  borrowed  from  the  civil  law ;  the 
royal  power  is  more  developed.  This  code  remained  in 
force  after  Charlemagne ;  but  Hincmar  says  that  few  contin- 
ued to  live  by  it.  In  the  Visigothic  laws  enacted  in  Spain, 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  Roman,  in  642,  all  the  barbarous  ele- 
ments have  disappeared ;  it  is  the  work  of  the  clergy,  half 
ecclesiastical,  half  imperial. 

It  has  been  remarked  by  acute  writers,  Guizot  and  Troja, 
that  the  Salic  law  does  not  answer  the  purpose  of  a  code, 
being  silent  on  some  of  the  most  important  regulations  of 
civil  society.  The  former  adds  that  we  often  read  of  mat- 
ters decided  "  secundum  legem  Salicam,"  concerning  which 
we  can  find  nothing  in  that  law.  He  presumes,  therefore, 
that  it  is  only  a  part  of  their  jurisprudence.  Troja  (Storia 
d'ltalia  nel  medio  evo,  v.  8),  quoting  Buat  for  the  same  opin- 
ion, thinks  it  probable  that  the  Franks  made  use  of  the  Ro- 
man law  where  their  own  was  defective.  It  may  perhaps  be 
not  less  probable  than  either  hypothesis  that  the  judges  grad- 
ually introduced  principles  of  decision  which,  as  in  our  com- 
mon law,  acquired  the  force  of  legislative  enactment.  The 
rules  of  the  Salic  code  principally  relate  to  the  punishment 
or  compensation  of  (-rimes ;  and  the  same  will  be  found  in 
our  earliest  Anglo-Saxon  laws.     The  object  of  such  written 


<,hap.  II.  ROMAN  NATIVES   OF  UAUL.  275 

laws,  with  a  free  and  barbarous  people,  was  not  to  record 
their  usages,  or  to  lay  down  rules  which  natural  equity  would 
suggest  as  the  occasion  might  arise,  but  to  prevent  the  arbi- 
trary infliction  of  penalties.  Chapter  lxii.,  '  On  Successions,' 
may  have  been  inserted  for  the  sake  of  the  novel  provision 
about  Salic  lands,  which  could  not  have  formed  a  part  of  old 
Teutonic  customs. 

Note  IV.     Pages  152,  153. 

The  position  of  the  former  inhabitants,  after  the  conquest 
of  Gaul  by  the  Burgundians,  the  Visigoths  and  the  Franks, 
both  relatively  to  the  new  monarchies  and  to  the  barbarian 
settlers  themselves,  is  a  question  of  high  importance.  It  has, 
of  course,  engaged  the  philosophical  school  of  the  present 
day,  and  has  led  to  much  diversity  of  hypotheses.  The 
extreme  poles  are  occupied,  one  by  M.  Raynouard  in  his 
Hist,  du  Droit  Municipal,'  and  by  a  somewhat  earlier 
writer,  Sir  Francis  Palgrave,  who,  following  the  steps  of 
Dubos,  bring  the  two  nations,  conquerors  and  conquered, 
almost  to  an  equality,  as  the  common  subjects  of  a  sovereign 
who  had  assumed  the  prerogatives  of  a  Roman  emperor; 
and,  on  the  opposite  side,  by  Signor  Troja,1  and  by  M. 
Thierry,  who  finds  no  closer  analogy  for  their  relative  condi- 
tions than  that  of  the  Greeks  and  Turks  in  the  days  that 
have  lately  gone  by.  "  It  is  no  more  a  proof,"  he  contends, 
u  that  the  Roman  natives  were  treated  as  free,  because  a  few 
might  gain  the  favor  of  a  despotic  court,  than  that  the  Chris- 
tian and  Jew  stand  on  an  even  footing  with  the  Mussulman, 
because  an  Eastern  Sultan  may  find  his  advantage  in  em 
ploying  some  of  either  religion."  (Lettres  sur  l'Hist.  de 
France,  Lett,  vii.)  This  is  not  quite  consistent  with  his  lan- 
guage in  a  later  work  :  "  Sous  le  regne  de  la  premiere  race 
se  montrent  deux  conditions  de  liberte  :  la  liberte  par  excel- 
lence, qui  est  la  condition  du  Franc ;  et  la  liberte  du  second 
ordre,  le  droit  de  cite  romaine."  (Recits  des  Temps  Merc- 
vingiens,  i.  242. — Bruxelles,  1840.) 

i  La  Storia  di  Francia  sotto  i  re  della  This  is  not  borne  out  by  history.    W« 

prima  razza  pno  dirsi  non  consistere  che  find  no  oppression  of  Romans  by  Franks, 

negli  esempj  del  le  oppression!  de'  Franchi  though    much    by   Frank    kings.      Th« 

sopra  i  cittadini  Romani,e  della  generosa  conquerors  may  have  he>m  nationally  in- 

protezione  de'  Tescovi  o  Romani  o  Franchi.  solent ;  but  this  In  not  recorded. 
(Storia  d'  Italia,  vol.  i.  part  v.  p.  421.) 

VOL,  I. — M,  18 


274  ROMAN   NATIVES   OF  GAUL.  Notes  tu 

It  is,  however,  as  it  seems  to  me,  and  as  the  French  writ- 
ers have  generally  held,  impossible  to  maintain  either  of 
these  theories.  The  Roman  "  conviva  regis  "  (by  which  .we 
may  perhaps  better  understand  one  who  had  been  actually 
admitted  to  the  royal  table,  thus  bearing  an  analogy  to  the 
Frank  Antrustion,  than  what  I  have  said  in  the  text,  one  of 
a  rank  not  unworthy  of  such  an  honor)1  was  estimated  in  his 
weregild  at  half  the  [trice  of  the  Barbarian  Antrustion,  the 
highest  known  class  at  the  Merovingian  court,  and  above  the 
common  alodial  proprietor.  But  between  two  such  land- 
holders the  same  proportion  subsisted  ;  the  Frank  was  val- 
ued twice  as  high  as  the  Roman  ;  but  the  Roman  proprietor 
was  set  more  than  as  much  above  the  tributary,  or  semi- 
servile  husbandman,  whose  nation  is  not  distinguished  by  the 
letter  of  the  Salic  code.  We  have,  therefore,  in  this  no- 
torious distinction,  subordination  without  servitude ;  exactly 
what  the  circumstances  of  the  conquest,  and  the  general  rela- 
tion of  the  barbarians  to  the  empire,  would  lead  us  to  antici- 
pate, and  what  our  historical  records  unequivocally  confirm. 
The  oppression  of  the  people,  which  Thierry  infers  from  the 
history  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  under  Gontran  and  Chilperic, 
was  on  the  part  of  violent  and  arbitrary  princes,  not  of  the 
Frank  nation  ;  nor  did  the  latter  by  any  means  escape  it.  It 
is  true  that  the  civil  wars  of  the  early  Merovingian  kings 
were  most  disastrous,  especially  in  Aquitaine,  and  of  course 
the  native  inhabitants  suffered  most ;  yet  this  is  very  distin- 
guishable from  a  permanent  condition  of  servitude. 

"  The  Romans,"  Sir  F.  Palgrave  has  said,  "  retained  their 
own  laws.  Their  municipal  administration  was  not  abrogated 
or  subverted;  and  wherever  a  Roman  population  subsisted, 
the  barbarian  king  was  entitled  to  command  them  with  the 
prerogatives  that  had  belonged  to  the  Roman  emperor-.' 
(Rise  and  Progress  of  the  English  Commonwealth,  vol.  i.  p. 
362.)  In  this  I  demur  only  to  the  word  entitled,  which  seems 
designed  to  imply  something  more  than  the  right  of  the  sword. 
But  this  is  the  right,  and  I  can  discern  no  real  evidence  ol 
any  other,  which  Clovis,  and  Clotaire,  and  Chilperic  exer- 
cised ;  very  like,  of  course,  to  the  prerogatives  of  the  Roman 
emperors,  since  one  despotism  must  be  akin  to  another;  and 

1  I  do   not  give   this  as   very   highly    senatorial  families,  who  evidently  made  a 
probable:    tonvwa   regis  seems  an  odd    noble  class  among  the  Romans. 
phrase  :  hut  it  may  have  included  all  the 


CriAP.  II.  ROMAN  NATIVES   OF  GAUL.  275 

a  provincial  of  Gaul,  whose  ancestors  had  for  centuries 
obeyed  an  unlimited  monarch,  could  not  claim  any  better 
privileges  by  becoming  the  subject  of  a  conqueror.  It  is 
universally  agreed,  at  least  I  apprehend  so,  that  the  Roman, 
as  a  mere  possessor,  and  independently  of  any  personal  dig- 
nity with  which  he  might  have  been  honored,  did  not  attend 
the  national  assemblies  in  the  Field  of  March ;  nor  had  he 
any  business  at  the  placitum  or  mallus  of  the  count  among 
the  Rachimburgii,  or  freeholders,  who  there  determined 
causes  according  to  their  own  jurisprudence,  and  transacted 
other  business  relating  to  their  own  nation.  The  kings  were 
always  styled  merely  "  Reges  Francorum : " 1  whenever,  in 
Gregory  of  Tours'  history,  the  popular  will  is  expressed,  it 
is  by  the  Franks ;  no  other  nation  separately,  nor  the  Franks 
as  blended  with  any  other  nation,  appear  in  Ins  pages  to  have 
acted  for  themselves 

It  must  be  almost  unnecessary  to  remind  the  reader  that 
the  word  Roman  is  uniformly  applied,  especially  in  the  bar- 
barian laws,  to  the  Gaulish  subjects  of  the  empire,  whose 
allegiance  had  been  transferred,  more  or  less  reluctantly,  but 
always  through  conquest,  to  the  three  barbarian  monarchies, 
two  of  which  were  ultimately  subverted  by  the  Franks.  But 
it  is  only  in  two  senses  that  this  can  be  reckoned  a  proper 
appellation  ;  one.  inasmuch  as  privileges  of  Roman  citizen- 
ship had  been  extended  to  the  whole  of  Gaul  by  the  emper- 
ors ;  and  another,  as  applicable,  with  more  correctness,  to 
that  population  of  Roman  or  Italian  descent  which  had 
gradually  settled  in  the  cities.  This,  during  so  many  ages, 
must  have  become  not  inconsiderable ;  the  long  continuance 
of  the  same  legions  in  the  province,  the  wealth  and  luxury 
of  many  cities,  the  comparative  security,  up  to  the  close  of 
the  fourth  century,  from  military  revolution  and  civil  war. 
the  facility,  perhaps,  of  purchasing  lands,  would  naturally 
jreate  a  respectable  class,  to  whose  highly  civilized  manners 
he  records  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  especially  bear 
witness.2     The  Latin   language  became  universal  in  cities ; 

1  One  instance  of  an  apparent  excep-  charter  deserves  to  be  considered.     But, 

tion.  for  leading  me  to  which  I  am  in-  supposing  it  to  be  genuine,  it  does  not  go 

lebted  to  Mr.  Spence  (Laws  of  Europe,  a  great  way  towards  the  imperial  style, 

p.  240).  has  met  my  eyes.     Dasjobert  I.  2  Salvian,   in   the   middle  of   the  fifth 

calls  himself,  iu  an  instrument  found  in  century,    descants  on    the    beauties    of 

Vita  Beati   Martini,   apud  Duchesne,  i.  Aquitaine ;  *'  Adeo  illic  omnia  admodum 

655,  "  Hex  Francorum  et  populi  Romani  regio  autintertexta  vineis,  aut  fJorulenta 

vrinreps  "      The    authenticity     of    this  pratis.  aut  distinctaculturis,  aut  cousits 


276  ROMAN   NATIVES   OF   GAUL.  Notes  tu 

and  if  in  country  villages  some  remains  of  the  Celtic  might 
linger,  they  have  left  very  few  traces  behind. 

Sismondi  has  indeed  gone  much  too  far  when  he  infers,  es- 
pecially from  this  disuse  of  the  old  language,  an  almost  com- 
plete extinction  of  the  Gaulish  population.     And  for  this  he 
accounts  by  their  reduction  to  servitude,  by  the  exactions  of 
their  new  lords,  and  the  facility  of  purchasing  slaves  in  die 
markets  of    the   empire  (vol.   i.   p.  84).     But  such  a   train 
of  events  is  wholly  without  evidence  ;  without  at  lea-t  any 
evidence  that  has  been  alleged.     We  do  not  know  that  the 
peasantry  were  ever  proprietors  of  the  soil  which  they  culti- 
vated before  the  Roman  invasion,  but  may  much  rather  be- 
lieve  the  contrary  from  the  language  of   Caesar  — "  Plebs 
pasne  servorum  habetur  loco."     We  do  not  know  that  they 
fell  into  a  worse  condition  afterwards.     We  do  not  know  that 
they  were  oppressed  in  a  greater  degree  than  other  subjects 
of  Rome,  not  surely  so  as  to  extinguish  the  population.     We 
may  believe  that  slaves  were  occasionally  purchased,  accord- 
ing to  the  usage  of  the  empire,  without  denying  the  existence 
of  coloni,  indigenous  and  personally  free,  of  whom  the  Theo- 
dosian  code  is  so  full.     Nor  is  it  evident  why  even  serfs  may 
not  have  been  of  native  as  easily  as  of  foreign  origin.     All 
this  is  presumed  by  Sismondi,  because  the  Latin  language, 
and  not  the  Celtic,  is  the  basis  of  French.     And  a  similar 
hypothesis  must,  by  parity  of  reasoning,  be  applied  to  the 
condition  of  Spain  during  the  centuries  of  Roman  dominion. 
But  it  is  assumed  the  more  readily,  through  the  tendency  of 
this  eminent  writer  to  place  in  the  worst  light,  what  seldom  can 
be  placed  in  a  very  favorable  one,  the  social  institutions  and 
usages  of  mankind.     The  change  of  language  is  no  doubt 
remarkable.     But  we  may  be  deceived  by  laying  too  much 
stress  on  this  single  circumstance  in  tracing  the   history  of 
nations.     It  is  very  difficult  to  lay  down  a  rule  as  to  the  ten- 
dency of  one  language  to  gain  ground  upon  another.     Some 
appear  in  their  nature  to  be  aggressive  ;  such  is  the  Latin, 
and  probably  the  Arabic.     But  why  is  it  that  so  much  of  the 
Walachian  language,  and  even  its  syntax,1  comes  from  Latin, 
in  consequence  of  a  merely  military  occupation,  while  a  more 

pomis,  aut  amoenata  lucis,  aut  irrigata  gineni   possedisse  Tideantur.v    (De  Qu 

fontibus,  aut  interfusa  tiuininibus,   aut  bernat.  Dei.  lib.  vii.  p.  299,  edit.  1611.) 

cixcnmdata  messibus  erat,  ut  vere  pos-  '  Fid.    Lauriani    Tentamen   Ciiticum 

-ores  et  doniini   tcrne  illius  non  tam  in  liiiguain  Walachicaiu.     Vie  tin.  1S40 
soli  illius  portionem  quam  paradisi  ima- 


Chap.  II.  ROMAN   NATIVES   OF  GAUL.  277 

lasting  possession  of  Britain  (where  flourishing  colonies  were 
filled  with  Roman  inhabitants,  and  the  natives  bonowed  in 
some  degree  the  arts  and  manners  of  their  conquerors,  con- 
nected with  them  also  by  religion  in  the  latter  part  of  their 
dominion)  did  not  hinder  the  preservation  of  the  original 
Celtic  idiom  in  Wales,  with  very  slight  infusion  of  Latin  ? 
Why  is  it  that  innumerable  Arabic  words,  and  even  some 
Arabic  sounds  of  letters,  are  found  in  the  Castilian  language, 
the  language  of  a  people  foreign  and  hostile,  while  scarcely 
a  trace  is  left  of  the  Visigothic  tongue,  that  of  their  fathers  ; 
so  that  for  one  word,  it  is  said,  of  Teutonic  origin  remaining 
in  Spain,  there  are  ten  in  Italy,  and  a  hundred  in  France  ?  * 
If  we  were  to  take  Sismondi  literally,  the  barbarians  must 
have  found  nothing  in  Gaul  but  a  Roman  or  Romanized 
aristocracy,  surrounded  by  slaves  ;  and  these  as  much  import- 
ed, or  the  offspring  o/  importation,  as  the  Negroes  in  Ameri- 
ca. This  is  rather  a  humiliating  origin,  an  Mud  quod  dicere 
nolo,  for  the  French  nation.  For  it  is  the  French  nation 
that  is  descended  from  the  inhabitants  of  Gaul  at  the  epoch 
of  the  barbarian  conquest. 

We  have,  however,  a  strong  ethnographical  argument 
against  this  imaginary  depopulation,  in  the  national  charac- 
teristics of  the  French.  A  brilliant  and  ingenious  writer 
has  well  called  our  attention  to  the  Celtic  element,  that  under 
all  the  modifications  which  difference  of  race,  political  con- 
stitutions, and  the  stealthy  progress  of  commerce  and  learn- 
ing have  brought  in,  still  distinguishes  the  Frenchman:  "La 
base  originaire,  celle  qui  a  tout  recu,  tout  accepte1,  c'est  cette 
jeune  molle  et  mobile  race  de  Gaels,  brillante,  sensuelle,  et 
legere,  prompte  a  apprendre,  prompte  a  dedaigner,  avide  des 
choses  nouvelles.  Voila  l'e  lenient  primitif,  l'eiement  perfecti- 
ble." (Alichelet,  Hist,  de  France,  i.  156.)  This  is  very  good, 
and  we  cannot  but  see  the  resemblance  to  the  Celtic  character. 
Michelet  goes  afterwards  too  far,  and  endeavors  to  show  that  a 
great  part  of  the  French  language  is  Celtic ;  failing  wholly  in  his 
quotations  from  early  writers,  which  either  relate  to  the  peri- 
od immediately  subsequent  to  the  Roman  conquest,  or  to  the 
lingua  Romana  rustica  which  ultimately  became  French.  It 
is  nevertheless  true  that  a  certain  number  of  Celtic  words 
have  been  retained  in  French,  as  has  been  shown  even  of 
Visigothic  by  M.  Fauriel.      He   has  found  3,000  words  in 

1  Etlinb.  Review,  vo.    vxxi.  p.  109 


278  ROMAN    NATIVES  OF  GAUL.  .Notes  10 

Provencal,  which  are  not  Latin.  All  of  these  which  are  not 
Gothic,  Iberian,  Greek,  or  Arabic,  may  be  reckoned  Celtic; 
and  though  the  former  languages  can  have  left  few  traces  in 
northern  French,  we  may  presume  the  last  to  have  been  re 
tained  in  a  scarcely  less  degree  than  in  the  Provencal  dia 
lect.  (Ampere,  Hist.  Litt.  de  la  France,  vol.  i.  p.  34.) 
Many  French  monosyllables  are  Celtic.  But  if  we  try  to 
read  any  French  of  the  twelfth  century,  we  shall  feel  no 
doubt  that  a  vast  majority  of  words  are  derived  from  the 
Latin  ;  and  it  may  be  added  that  the  terms  of  rural  occupa- 
tion, and  generally  of  animals,  are  full  as  much  Latin  as 
those  more  familiar  in  towns. 

The  cities  of  Gaul  were  occupied  probably  by  a  more 
mingled  population  than  the  villages.  In  the  cities  dwelt  the 
more  ancient  and  wealthy  families,  called  senators,,  and  dis- 
tinct, as  far  as  we  can  see  our  way  in  a  very  perplexed  in- 
quiry, from  the  ordinary  curiales,  or  decurions.  It  is  true 
that  these  also  are  sometimes  called  senators ;  but  the  word 
has  not,  as  Guizot  observes  (Collect,  des  Memoires,  i.  247), 
in  Gregory  and  other  writers,  a  precise  sense.  Families 
were  often  elevated  to  the  senatorial  rank  by  the  emperors, 
which  gave  their  members  the  title  of  clarissimi  ;  and  these 
were  probably  meant  by  Gregory,  in  the  expression  e  primis 
Galliarum  senatoribus,  which  naturally  must  be  rendered  — 
"  of  the  first  Gaulish  nobility."  The  word  is  several  times 
employed  by  him  in  what  seems  the  same  sense.  It  is,  how- 
ever, also  used,  as  Guizot  and  Raynouard  think,  for  the  high- 
est class  of  curiales  who  had  served  municipal  offices.  But 
aiore  will  be  said  of  this  in  another  note. 

Sismondi  has  remarked  (i.  198)  that  in  the  lives  of  the 
saints,  during  the  Merovingian  period,  most  part  of  whom 
were  of  Roman  descent,  it  is  generally  mentioned  that  they 
were  of  good  family.  The  Church  afforded  the  means  of 
preserving  their  respectability;  and  thus  (without  much 
weight  in  the  monarchy,  and  often  with  diminished  patrimo- 
ny, but  in  return  less  oppressed  by  taxation  than  under  the 
imperial  fisc,  deriving  also  a  reflected  importance  from  the 
bishop  when  he  wras  a  Roman,  and  sheltered  by  his  protec- 
tion) this  class  of  the  native  inhabitants  held  not  only  a  free 
but  an  honorable  position.  Yet  this  was  still  secondary.  In 
a  free  commonwealth  the  exclusion  from  political  rights,  by  a 
broad  line  of  legal  separation,  brings  with  it  an  indelibln 


OTAP.  II.  ROMAN  NATIVES   OF   GAUL  279 

sense  of  inferiority.     But  this  inferiority  is  not  allowed  by 
all  our  inquirers. 

"  The  nations  who  were  unequal  before  the  law  soon  be- 
came equal  before  the  sovereign,  if  not  in  theory  yet  in 
practice ;  and  the  children  of  the  companions  of  Clovis  were 
subjected,  with  few  and  not  very  material  exceptions,  to  the 
same  positive  dominion  as  the  descendants  of  the  proconsul 
or  the  senator.  It  is  not  difficult  to  form  plausible  conjec- 
tures concerning  the  causes  of  this  equalization  ;  nor  are  the 
means  by  which  it  was  effected  entirely  concealed.  Consid- 
ered in  relation  to  the  Romans,  the  Franks,  for  we  will  con- 
tinue to  instance  them,  constituted  a  distinct  state,  but, 
compared  to  the  Romans,  a  very  small  one ;  and  the  indi- 
viduals composing  it,  dispersed  over  Gaul,  were  almost  lost 
among  the  tributaries.  Experience  has  shown  that  whenever 
a  lesser  or  poorer  dominion  is  conjoined,  in  the  person  of  the 
same  sovereign,  to  a  greater  or  more  opulent  one,  the  minuter 
mass  is  always  in  the  end  subjugated  by  the  larger."  (Rise 
and  Progress  of  the  English  Commonwealth,  vol.  i.  p.  363.) 

Such  is,  in  a  few  words,  the  view  taken  of  the  Merovingian 
history  by  a  very  learned  writer,  Sir  F.  Palgrave.  And, 
doubtless,  the  concluding  observation  is  just,  in  the  terms 
wherein  he  expresses  it.  But  there  seems  a  fallacy  in  apply- 
ing the  word  "  poorer  "  to  the  Franks,  or  any  barbarian  con- 
querors of  Gaul.  They  were  poorer  before  their  conquest ; 
they  were  richer  afterwards.  At  the  battle  of  Hastings  the 
balance  of  wealth  was,  I  doubt  not,  on  the  side  of  HarolcTmore 
than  of  William;  but  twenty  years  afterwards  Domesday 
Book  tells  us  a  very  different  story.  If  an  allotment  was 
made  among  the  Franks,  or  if  they  served  themselves  to  land 
without  any  allotment,  on  either  hypothesis  they  became  the 
great  proprietors  of  northern  France  ;  and  on  whom  else  did 
the  beneficiary  donations,  the  rewards  of  faithful  Antrustions, 
generally  devolve  ?  It  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  national 
superiority  of  the  Franks  in  the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries 
that  in  the  last  age  of  the  Carlovingian  line,  when  the  dis- 
tinction of  laws  had  been  abolished  or  disused,  the  more 
numerous  people  should  in  many  provinces  have  (not,  as  Sir 
Francis  Palgrave  calls  it,  subjugated  but)  absorbed  the  other. 
We  find  this  to  have  been  the  case  at  the  close  of  the  Anglo 
Norman  period  at  home. 

One  essential  difference  is  generally  supposed  to  have  sep- 


280  ROMAN  NATIVES  OF   GAUL.  Notes  *u 

arated  the  Frank  from  the  Roman.  The  latter  was  subject 
to  personal  and  territorial  taxation.  Such  had  been  his  con- 
dition under  the  empire  ;  and  whether  the  burden  might  or 
not  be  equal  in  degree  (probably  it  was  not  such),  it  is  not 
at  all  reasonable  to  believe  without  proof  that  he  was  ever 
exempted  from  it.  It  is,  however,  true  that  some  French 
writers  have  assumed  all  territorial  impositions  on  free  land- 
holders to  have  ceased  after  the  conquest.  (Recits  des  Temps 
Meroving.  i.  268).1  This  controversy  I  do  not  absolutely 
undertake  to  determine  ;  but  the  proof  evidently  lies  on  those 
who  assert  the  Roman  to  have  been  more  favored  than  he 
was  under  the  empire ;  when  all  were  liable  to  the  land-tax, 
though  only  those  destitute  of  freehold  possessions  paid  the 
capitation  or  census.  We  cannot  infer  such  a  distinction  or. 
the  ground  of  tenure  from  a  passage  of  Gregory  (lib.  ix.  c. 
30)  :  —  Childebertus  vero  rex  descriptores  in  Pictavos,  in- 
vitante  Marovio  episcopo,  jussit,  abire  ;  id  est,  Florentianum 
majorem  donius  regiae,  et  Romulfum  palatii  sui  comitem,  ut 
scilicet  populus  censum  quern  tempore  patris  functi  fuerant, 
facta  ratione  innovaturae,  reddere  deberet.  Multi  enim  ex 
his  defuncti  fuerant,  et  ob  hoc  viduis  orphanisque  ac  debilibus 
tributi  pondus  inciderat.  Quod  hi  discutientes  per  ordinem, 
relaxantes  pauperes  ac  infirmos,  illos  quos  justitice  conditio 
tributarios  dabat,  censu  publico  subsiderunt."  These  collec- 
tors were  repelled  by  the  citizens  of  Tours,  who  proved  that 
Clotaire  I.  had  released  their  city  from  any  public  tribute, 
out  of  respect  for  St.  Martin.  And  the  reigning  king  ac- 
quiesced in  this  immunity.  It  may  also  be  inferred  from 
another  passage  (Lib.  x.  c.  7)  that  even  ecclesiastical  property 
was  not  exempt  from  taxation,  unless  by  special  privilege, 
which  indeed  seems  to  be  implied  in  the  many  charters  con- 
ceding this  immunity,  and  in  the  forms  of  Marculfus.2 

i  M.  Lehuerou  imputes  the  same  theory  subject  of  taxation,  clearly  proves,  in  my 

to  Montesquieu.     But  his  words  (Espr.  opiuion,  that  the  land-tax  imposed  under 

des  Loix,  xxx.  13)  do  not  assert  that  the  the  empire  continued  to  be  levied  on  the 

Romans  might  not  be  subject  to  taxation  Roman  BUbjects  of  Clovia  and  the  next 

in  the  earlier  Merovingian  period  ;  though  two  generations.    ( Vol.  i.  p.  211,  et  post.) 

afterwards,  as  he  supposes,  this  obliga-  The  Franks,  such  as  were  ingenui,  were 

tion  was  replaced  by  that  of  military  ser-  originally  exempt  from  this  and  all  other 

vice.  tribute.     Of  this  M.  Lehuerou  niaKe-s  no 

2  This  note  was  written  before  T  had  doubt;  nor,  perhaps,  has  anyone  doubt- 
looked  at  a  work  published  in  1843.  by  ed  it,  except  Dubos.  But.  under  the  sons 
M.  Lehuerou,  '  Ilistoire  des  Institutions  and  grandsons  of  Clovis.  endeavors  were 
Merovingiennes,'  in  which,  with  much  made,  to  which  I  have  drawn  attention 
Impartiality  and  erudition,  he  draws  a  in  a  subsequent  note,  by  those  despotic 
line  hetween  the  theories  of  Dubos  and  princes,  eager  to  assume  the  imperial 
Montesquieu ;  and,  upou  this  particular  prerogatives   over  all  their   subjects,  to 


Chap.  II.  ROMAN  NATIVES   OF   GAUL.  281 

It  seems,  however,  clear  that  the  Frank  landholder,  the 
Francus  ingenuns,  born  to  his  share,  according  to  old  notions, 
of  national  sovereignty,  gave  indeed  his  voluntary  donation 
annually  to  the  king,  but  reckoned  himself  entirely  free  from 
rompulsory  tribute.  We  read  of  no  tax  imposed  by  the  as- 
semblies of  the  Field  of  March  ;  and  if  the  kings  had  pos- 
sessed the  prerogative  of  levying  money  at  will,  the  monarchy 
must  have  become  wholly  absolute  without  opposition.  The 
barbarian  was  distinguished  by  his  abhorrence  of  tribute. 
Tyranny  might  strip  one  man  of  his  possessions,  banish 
another  from  his  country,  destroy  the  life  of  a  third  ;  the 
rest  would  at  the  utmost  murmur  in  silence  ;  but  a  general 
imposition  on  them  as  a  people  was  a  yoke  under  which  they 
would  not  pass  without  resistance.  I  shall  mention  a  few 
instances  in  a  future  note.  The  Roman,  on  the  other  hand, 
complained  doubtless  of  new  or  unreasonable  taxation  ;  but 
he  could  not  avoid  acknowledging  a  principle  of  government 
to  which  his  forefathers  had  for  so  many  ages  submitted. 
The  house  of  Clovis  stood  to  him  in  place  of  the  Cassars  ;  this 
part  of  the  theory  of  Dubos  cannot  be  disputed.  But  when 
that  writer  extends  the  same  to  the  Frank,  as  a  constitutional 
position,  and  not  merely  referring  to  acts  protested  against  as 
illegal,  the  voice  of  history  refutes  him. 

Dubos  has  asserted,  and  is  followed  by  many,  that  the 
army  of  Clovis  was  composed  of  but  a  few  thousand  Salian 
Franks.  And  for  this  the  testimony  of  Gregory  has  been 
adduced,  who  informs  us  only  that  3,000  of  the  army  of  Clovis 
(a  later  writer  says  6,000)  were  baptized  with  him.  (Greg. 
Tur.  lib.  ii.  c.  33.)  But  Clovis  was  not  the  sole  chieftain  of 
his  tribe.  It  has  been  seen  that  he  enlarged  his  command 
towards  the  close  of  his  life,  by  violent  measures  with  respect 
to  other  kings  as  independent  apparently  as  himself,  and  some 
of  whom  belonged  to  his  family.  Thus  the  Ripuarian  Franks, 
who  occupied  the*  left  bank  of  the  Rhine,  came  under  his 
sway.  And  besides  this,  the  argument  from  the  number  of 
soldiers  baptized  with  Clovis  assumes  that  the  whole  army 
embraced  Christianity  with  their  king.  It  is  true  that  Greg- 
ory seems  to  imply  this.  But,  even  in  the  seventh  century 
the  Franks  on  the  Meuse  and  Scheldt  were  still  chiefly  pagan 

rob  them  of  their  national  immunity ;    sonal  authority  of  the  sovereign.    (Hist 
anil  a  struggle  of  the  German  aristocra-    des  Inst.  Meroving.  i.  425,  et  post  ) 
vj  ensued,  which   annihilated  the  per- 


282  ROMAN  NATIVES  OF  GAUL.  Notes  m 

as  the  Lives  of  the  Saint-  are  said  by  Thierry  to  prove.  We 
have  only,  ii  is  to  be  remembered,  a  declamatory  and  super- 
ficial history  for  this  period,  derived,  as  I  believe,  from  the 
panegyrical  life  of  St.  Remy,  and  bearing  traces  of  legendary 
incorrectness  and  exaggeration.  We  may,  however,  appeal 
to  other  criteria. 

It  cannot  be  too  frequently  inculcated  on  the  reader  who 
desires  to  form  a  general  but  tolerably  exact  notion  of  the 
state  of  France  under  the  first  line  of  kings,  that  he  is  not 
hastily  to  draw  inferences  from  one  of  the  three  divisions, 
Austrasia,  Neustria,  and  Aquitaine,  to  which,  for  a  part  of 
the  period,  we  must  add  Burgundy,  to  the  rest.  The  differ- 
ence of  language,  though  not  always  decisive,  furnishes  a  pre- 
sumption of  different  origin.  We  may  therefore  estimate, 
with  some  probability,  the  proportion  of  Franks  settled  in  the 
monarchy  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine,  by  the  extent  of 
country  wherein  the  Teutonic  language  is  spoken,  unless  we 
have  reason  to  suspect  that  any  change  in  the  boundaries  of 
that  and  the  French  has  since  taken  place.  The  Latin  was 
certainly  an  encroaching  language,  and  its  daughter  has  in 
some  measure  partaken  of  the  same  character.  Many  causes 
are  easy  to  assign  why  either  might  have  gained  ground  on 
two  dialects,  the  German  and  Flemish,  contiguous  to  it  on 
the  eastern  frontier,  while  we  can  hardly  perceive  one  for  an 
opposite  result.  We  find,  nevertheless,  that  both  have  very 
nearly  kept  their  ancient  limits.  It  has  been  proved  by  M. 
Raoux,  in  the  Memoirs  of  the  Academy  of  Brussels  (vol.  iv. 
p.  411),  that  few  towns  or  villages  have  changed  their  lan- 
guage since  the  ninth  century.  The  French  or  Walloon  fol 
lowed  in  that  early  age  the  irregular  line  which,  running  from 
Calais  and  St.  Omer  to  Lisle  and  Tournay,  stretches  north  of 
the  Meuse  as  far  as  Liege,  and,  bending  thence  to  the  south- 
westward,  passes  through  Longwy  to  Metz.  These  towns 
speak  French,  and  spoke  it  under  Charlemagne,  if  we  can  say 
that  under  Charlemagne  French  was  spoken  anywhere  ;  at 
least  they  spoke  a  dialect  of  Latin  origin.  The  exceptions 
are  few  ;  but  where  they  exist,  it  is  from  the  progress  of 
French  rather  than  the  contrary.  A  writer  of  the  sixteenth 
century  says  of  St.  Omer  that  it  was  "Olim  hand  dubie  mere 
Flandricum,  deinde  tamen  bilingue,  nunc  autem  in  totum  fere 
Gallicum."  There  has  also  been  a  slight  movement  toward 
French  in  the  last  fifty  years. 


Chap.  n.  £OMAN  NATIVES   OF   GAUL.  233 

The  most  remarkable  evidence  for  the  duration  of  the 
limit  is  the  act  of  partition  between  Lothaire  of  Lorraine  and 
Charles  the  Bald,  in  870,  whence  it  appears  that  the  names 
of  places  where  French  is  now  spoken  were  then  French. 
Yet  most  of  these  had  been  built,  especially  the  abbeys,  sub- 
sequently to  the  Frank  conquest :  "  d'ou  on  peut  conclure 
que  meme  dans  le  periode  franque,  le  langage  vulgaire  du 
grand  nombre  des  habitans  du  pays,  qui  sont  presentement 
Wallons,  n'etait  pas  teutonique ;  car  on  en  verrait  des  traces 
rians  les  actes  historiques  et  geographiques  de  ce  temps-la." 
(P.  434.)  Nothing,  says  M.  Michelet,  can  be  more  French 
than  the  Walloon  country.  (Hist,  de  France,  viii.  287.)  He 
expatiates  almost  with  enthusiasm  on  the  praise  of  this  people, 
who  seem  to  have  retained  a  large  share  of  his  favorite 
Celtic  element.  It  appears  that  the  result  of  an  investiga- 
tion into  the  languages  on  the  Alsatian  frontier  would  be 
much  the  same.  Here,  therefore,  we  have  a  very  reasonable 
presumption  that  the  forefathers  of  the  Flemish  Belgians, 
as  well  as  of  the  people  of  Alsace,  were  barbarians  :  some 
of  the  former  may  be  sprung  from  Saxon  colonies  planted  in 
Brabant  by  Charlemagne ;  but  we  may  derive  the  majority 
from  Salian  and  Ripuarian  Franks.  These  were  the 
strength  of  Austrasia,  and  among  these  the  great  restorer, 
or  rather  founder,  of  the  empire  fixed  his  capital  at  Aix-la- 
Chapelle. 

In  Aquitaine,  on  the  other  hand,  everything  appears 
Roman,  in  contradistinction  to  Frank,  except  the  reigning 
family.  The  chief  difficulty,  therefore,  concerns  Neustria 
that  is,  from  the  Scheldt,  or,  perhaps,  the  Somme,  to  the 
Loire ;  and  to  this  important  kingdom  the  advocates  of  the 
two  nations,  Roman  and  Frank,  lay  claim.  M.  Thierry  has 
paid  much  attention  to  the  subject,  and  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that,  in  the  seventh  century,  the  number  of  Frank  land 
holders,  from  the  Rhine  to  the  Loire,  much  exceeded  that 
of  the  Roman.  And  this  excess  he  takes  to  have  been  in- 
creased through  the  seizure  of  Church  lands  in  the  next  age 
by  Charles  Martel,  who  bestowed  them  on  his  German  troops 
enlisted  beyond  the  Rhine.  The  method  which  Thierry  has 
pursued,  in  order  to  ascertain  this,  is  ingenious  and  presump- 
tively right.  He  remarked  that  the  names  of  places  will 
often  indicate  whether  the  inhabitants,  or  more  often  the 
chief  proprietor,  were  of  Roman  or  Teutonic  origin.     Thus 


284  ROMAN  NATIVES   OF  GAUL.  Notes  to 

Franconville  and  Romainville,  near  Paris,  are  distinguished, 

in  charters  of  the  ninth  century,  as  Francorum  villa  and 
Romanorum  villa.     This  is  an  instance  where  the  population 

seems  to  have  been  of  different  race.  But  commonly  the 
owner's  Christian  name  is  followed  by  a  familiar  termination. 
In  that  same  neighborhood  proper  names  of  German  origin, 
with  the  terminations  ville,  court,  mont,  vol,  and  the  like,  are 
very  frequent.  And  this  he  finds  to  be  generally  the  case 
Dorth  of  the  Loire,  compared  with  the  left  bank  of  that  river, 
it  is,  of  course,  to  be  understood  that  this  proportion  of 
superior  landholders  did  not  extend  to  the  general  population. 
For  that,  in  all  Neustrian  France,  was  evidently  composed 
of  those  who  spoke  the  rustic  Roman  tongue  —  the  corrupt 
language  which,  in  the  tenth  or  eleventh  century,  became 
worthy  of  the  name  of  French ;  and  this  was  the  case,  as 
we  have  just  seen,  in  part  of  Austrasia,  as  Champagne  and 
Lorraine. 

We  may,  therefore,  conclude  that  the  Franks,  even  in  the 
reign  of  Clovis,  were  rather  a  numerous  people  —  including, 
of  course,  the  Ripuarian  as  well  as  the  Salian  tribe.  They 
certainly  appear  in  great  strength  soon  afterwards.  If  we 
believe  Procopius,  the  army  which  Theodebert,  king  only  of 
Austrasia,  led  into  Italy  in  539,  amounted  to  100,000.  And, 
admitting  the  probability  of  great  exaggeration,  we  could 
not  easily  reconcile  this  with  a  very  low  estimate  of  Frank 
numbers.  But,  to  say  the  truth,  I  do  not  rely  much  on  this 
statement.  It  is,  at  all  events,  to  be  remembered  that  the 
dominions  of  Theodebert,  on  each  side  of  the  Rhine,  would 
furnish  barbarian  soldiers  more  easily  than  those  of  the 
western  kingdoms.  Some  may  conjecture  that  the  army 
was  partly  composed  of  Romans ;  yet  it  is  doubtful  whether 
they  served  among  the  Franks  at  so  early  a  period,  though 
we  find  them  some  years  afterwards  under  Chilperic,  a 
Neustrian  sovereign.  The  armies  of  Aquitaine,  it  is  said, 
were  almost  wholly  composed  of  Romans  or  Goths  ;  it  could 
not  have  been  otherwise. 

The  history  of  Gregory,  which  terminates  in  598,  affords 
numerous  instances  of  Romans  in  the  highest  offices,  not 
merely  of  trust,  but  of  power.  Such  were  Celsus,  Amatus, 
Mummolus,  and  afterwards  Protadius  in  Burgundy,  and  De- 
siderius  in  Aquitaine.  But  in  these  two  parts  of  the  mon- 
archy we  might  anticipate  a  greater  influence  of  the  native 


Chap.  EL  KOMAN  NATIVES   OF   GAUL.  285 

population.  In  Neustria  and  Austrasia,  a  Roman  count,  or 
mayor  of  the  palace,  might  have  been  unfavorably  beheld. 
Yet  in  the  latter  kingdom,  all  Frank  a*  it  was  in  its  general 
character,  we  find,  even  before  the  middle  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, Lupus,  duke  of  Champagne,  a  man  of  considerable 
weight,  and  a  Roman  by  birth;  and,  it  was  the  policy  after- 
wards of  Brunehaut  to  employ  Romans.  But  this  not  only 
excited  the  hostility  of  the  Austrasian  Franks,  but  of  the 
Burgundians  themselves  ;  nor  did  anything  more  tend  to  the 
ruin  of  that  ambitious  woman.  Despotism,  through  its  most 
ready  instruments,  was  her  aim ;  and,  when  she  signally 
failed  in  the  attempt,  the  star  of  Germany  prevailed.  From 
that  time,  Austrasia  at  least,  if  not  Neustria,  became  a  Frank 
aristocracy.  We  hear  little  more  of  Romans,  ecclesiastics 
excepted,  in  considerable  power. 

If,  indeed,  we  could  agree  with  Montesquieu  and  Mably, 
that  a  Roman  subject  might  change  his  law  and  live  by  the 
Salic  code  at  his  discretion,  his  equality  with  the  Franks 
would  have  been  virtually  recognized ;  since  every  one 
might  place  himself  in  the  condition  of  the  more  favored 
nation.  And  hence  Mably  accounts  for  the  prevalence  of 
the  Frank  jurisprudence  in  the  north  of  France,  since  it 
was  more  advantageous  to  adopt  it  as  a  personal  law.  The 
Roman  might  become  an  alodial  landholder,  a  member  of  the 
sovereign  legislature  in  the  Field  of  March.  His  weregild 
would  be  raised,  and  with  that  his  relative  situation  in  the 
commonwealth  ;  his  lands  would  be  exempt  from  taxation. 
But  this  theory  has  been  latterly  rejected.  We  cannot, 
indeed,  conceive  one  less  consonant  to  the  principles  of  the 
barbarian  kingdoms,  or  the  general  language  of  the  laws. 
Montesquieu  was  deceived  by  a  passage  in  an  early  capitu- 
lary, of  which  the  best  manuscripts  furnish  a  different  read- 
ing. Mably  was  pleased  with  an  hypothesis  which  rendered 
the  basis  of  the  state  more  democratical.  But  the  first  who 
propagated  this  error,  and  on  more  plausible  grounds  than 
Montesquieu,  though  he  (Esprit  des  Loix,  liv.  xxviii.  c.  4) 
seems  to  claim  it  as  a  discovery  of  his  own,  were  Du  Cange 
and  Muratori.  They  were  misled  by  an  edict  of  the  em- 
peror Lothaire  Lin  824:  —  "  Volumus  ut  cunctus  populus 
Romanus  interrogetur  quali  lege  vult  vivere,  ut  tali,  quali  pro* 
fessi  fuerint  vivere  velle,  vivant."  But  Savigny  has  proved 
that  this  was  a  peculiar  exception  of  favor  granted  at  that  time 


28G  DISTINCTION  OF  LAWS.  Notes  to 

to  the  Romans,  or  rather  separately  to  each  person;  and  that 
not  as  a  privilege  of  the  ancient  population,  but  for  the  sake 
of  the  barbarians  who  had  settled  al  Rome.  Raynouard  is 
one  of  those  who  have  been  deceived  by  the  more  obvious 
meaning  of  this  law,  and  adopts  the  notion  o"  Mably  on  its 
authority.  Were  it  even  to  bear  such  an  interpretation,  we 
could  not  draw  a  general  inference  from  it.  In  the  case  of 
married  women,  or  of  the  clergy,  the  liberty  of  changing  the 
law  of  birth  was  really  permitted.  (See  Savigny,  i.  134,  et 
post,  Engl,  transl.) 

Tt  should,  however,  be  mentioned,  that  a  late  very  learned 
writer,  Troja,  admits  the  hypothesis  of  a  change  of  law  in 
France,  not  as  a  right  in  every  Roman's  power,  but  as  a 
special  privilege  sometimes  conceded  by  the  king.  And  we 
may  think  this  conjecture  not  unworthy  of  regard,  since  it 
serves  to  account  for  what  is  rather  anomalous  —  the  admis- 
sion of  mere  Romans,  at  an  early  period,  to  the  great  offices 
of  the  monarchy,  and  especially  to  that  of  count,  which  in 
volved  the  rank  of  presiding  in  the  Frank  malJus.  It  is  said 
that  Romans  sometimes  assumed  German  names,  though 
the  contrary  never  happened  ;  and  this  of  itself  seems  to  in- 
dicate a  change,  as  far  as  was  possible,  of  national  connection. 
But  it  is  of  little  service  to  the  hypothesis  of  Montesquieu 
and  Mably.  Of  the  edict  of  Lothaire  Troja  thinks  lik  j 
Savigny ;  but  he  adopts  the  reading  of  the  capitulary,  as 
quoted  by  Montesquieu,  "  Francum,  aut  barbarum,  aut 
jiominem  qui  lege  Salica  vivit ; "  where  the  best  manuscripts 
omit  the  second  aut. 

Note  V.     Page  155. 

This  subject  has  been  fully  treated  in  the  celebrated  work 
by  Savigny,  '  History  of  Roman  Law  in  the  Middle  Ages. 
The  diligence  and  fidelity  of  this  eminent  writer  have  been 
acknowledged  on  all  sides  ;  nor  has  any  one  been  so  copious 
in  collecting  materials  for  the  history  of  mediaeval  jurispru- 
dence, or  so  perspicuous  in  arranging  them.  In  a  few  points 
later  inquirers  have  not  always  concurred  with  him.  But, 
with  the  highest  respect  for  Savigny,  we  may  say,  that  of  the 
two  leading  propositions  —  namely,  first,  the  continuance  of 
the  Theodosian  code,  copied  into  the  Breviarium  Aniani,  as 
the  personal  law  of  the  Roman  inhabitants,  both  of  France 


Chap  n  DISTINCTION  OF  LAWS.  287 

and  Italy,  for  several  centuries  after  the  subjugation  of  those 
countries  by  the  barbarians  ;  and,  secondly,  the  quotation  of 
the  Pandects  and  other  parts  of  the  law  of  Justinian  by 
some  few  writers,  before  the  pretended  discovery  of  a  manu- 
script at  Amain  —  the  former  has  been  perfectly  well  known, 
as  least  ever  since  the  publication  of  the  glossary  of  Ducange 
in  the  seventeenth  century,  and  that  of  Muratori's  Disserta- 
tions on  Italian  Antiquities  in  the  next;  nor,  indeed,  could  it 
possibly  have  been  overlooked  by  any  one  who  had  read  the 
barbarian  codes,  full  as  they  are  of  reference  to  those  who 
followed  the  laws  of  Rome ;  while  the  second  is  also  proved, 
though  not  so  abundantly,  by  several  writers  of  the  last  age. 
Guizot,  praising  Savigny  for  his  truthfulness,  and  for  having 
shown  the  permanence  of  Roman  jurisprudence  in  Europe, 
well  asks  how  it  could  ever  have  been  doubted.  (Civil,  en 
France,  Lecon  11.) 

A  late  writer,  indeed,  has  maintained  that  the  Romans  did 
not  preserve  their  law  under  the  Lombards ;  elaborately  re- 
pelling the  proofs  to  the  contrary,  alleged  by  Muratori  and 
Savigny.  (See  Troja,  Discorso  della  Condizione  dei  Romani 
vinti  dai  Longobardi,  subjoined  to  the  fourth  volume  of  his 
Storia  d'  Italia.)  He  does  not  admit  that  the  inhabitants 
were  treated  by  the  Lombard  conquerors  as  anything  better 
than  tributaries  or  coloni.  Even  the  bishops  and  clergy 
were  judged  according  to  the  Lombard  law  (vol.  v.  p.  86). 
The  personal  law  did  not  come  in  till  the  conquest  of  Charle- 
magne, who  established  it  in  Italy.  And  though  later,  ac- 
cording to  this  writer,  in  its  origin,  the  distinctions  introduced 
by  it  subsisted  much  longer  than  they  did  in  France.  In- 
stances of  persons  professing  to  live  by  the  Lombard  law  are 
found  very  late  in  the  middle  ages ;  the  last  is  at  Bergamo, 
in  1388.  But  Bergamo  was  a  city  in  which  the  Jyombard 
population  had  predominated.     (Savigny,  vol.  i.  p.  378.) 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  case  in  Lombardy,  the  exis- 
tence of  personal  law  in  France  is  beyond  question.  It  is 
far  more  difficult  to  fix  a  date  for  its  termination.  These 
national  distinctions  were  indelibly  preserved  in  the  south  of 
France  by  a  law  of  Valentinian  III.,  copied  into  the  Bre- 
viarium  Aniani,  which  prohibited  the  intermarriage  of  Ro- 
mans with  barbarians.  This  was  abolished  so  far  as  to 
legalize  such  unions,  with  the  permission  of  the  count,  by  n 
law  of  the  Visigoths  in  Spain,  between  653  and  672.     Bun 


288  DISTINCTION  OF    i.AWS.  Notes  to 

such  an  enactment  could  not  have  been  obligatory  in  Franca 
Whether  the  Frank-  ever  took  Roman  wive-  I  cannot  say  : 
we  have,  as  far  as  I  am  aware,  no  instance  of  it  in  their 
royal  family.  Proofs  might,  perhaps,  be  found,  with  respect 
to  private  families,  in  the  Lives  of  the  Saint-;  or,  if  none, 
presumptions  to  the  contrary.  Troja  (Storia  d'ltalia,  p. 
1204)  says  that  St.  Medard  was  the  offspring  of  a  marriage 
between  a  Frank  and  a  Roman  mother,  before  the  conquest 
by  Clovis,  and  that  the  father  lived  in  the  Vermandois. 
Savigny  observes  that  the  prohibition  could  only  have  ex- 
isted anions  the  Visigoths ;  else  a  woman  could  not  have 
changed  her  law  by  marriage.  This,  however,  seems  rather 
applicable  to  Italy  than  to  the  north  of  France,  where  we 
have  no  proof  of  such  a  regulation.  Raynouard,  whose  con 
-taut  endeavor  is  to  elevate  the  Roman  population,  assumes 
that  the)'  would  have  disdained  intermarriage  with  barba- 
rian-. (Hist,  du  Droit  Municipal,  i.  288.)  But  the  only 
instance  which  he  adduces,  strangely  enough,  is  that  of  a 
Goth  with  a  Frank  ;  which,  we  are  informed,  was  reckoned 
to  disparage  the  former.  It  is  very  likely,  nevertheless,  that 
a  Frank  Antrustion  would  not  have  held  himself  highly 
honored  by  an  alliance  with  either  a  Goth  or  a  Roman. 
Each  nation  had  its  own  pride ;  the  conqueror  in  arms  and 
dominion,  the  conquered  in  polished  manners  and  ancient 
renown. 

"  At  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  century,"  says  M.  Guizot, 
M  the  essential  characteristic  is  that  laws  are  personal  and  not 
territorial.  At  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  the  reverse 
prevails,  except  in  a  very  few  instances."  (Lecon  25.  But 
can  we  approximate  no  nearer  ?  The  territorial  element,  to 
use  that  favorite  word,  seems  to  show  itself  in  an  expression 
of  the  edict  of  Pistes,  8G4:  —  "In  iis  regionihus  qiue  legem 
Romanam  sequuntur."  (Capit.  Car.  Calvi.)  This  must  be 
taken  to  mean  the  south  of  France,  where  the  number  of 
persons  who  followed  any  other  law  may  have  been  incon- 
siderable, relatively  to  the  rest,  so  that  the  name  of  the  dis- 
trict is  used  collectively  for  the  inhabitant-.  (Savigny,  i. 
162.)  And  this  became  the  pays  du  droit  ecrit,  bounded,  at 
least  in  a  loose  sense,  by  the  Loire,  wherein  the  Roman  was 
the  common  law  down  to  the  French  revolution  ;  the  laws 
of  Justinian,  in  the  progress  of  learning,  having  naturally 
taken  place  of  the  Theodosian.     But  in  the  same  capitulary 


Chap.  II.  DISTINCTION  OF  LAWS.  28S 

we  read,  —  "  De  illis  qui  secundum  legem  Romanam  vivunt, 
nihil  aliud  nisi  quod  in  iisdein  continetur  legibus,  definimus. 
And  the  king  (Charles  the  Bald)  emphatically  declares  that 
neither  that  nor  any  other  capitulary  which  he  or  his  prede- 
cessors had  made  is  designed  for  those  who  obeyed  the  Roman 
law.  The  fact  may  be  open  to  some  limitation  ;  but  we  have 
here  an  express  recognition  of  the  continuance  of  the  separate 
races.  It  seems  highly  probable  that  the  interference  of  the 
bishops,  still  in  a  great  measure  of  Roman  birth,  and,  even 
where  otherwise,  disposed  to  favor  Roman  policy,  contributed 
to  protect  the  ancient  inhabitants  from  a  legislature  wherein 
they  were  not  represented.  And  this  strongly  corroborates  . 
the  probability  that  the  Romans  had  never  partaken  of  the 
legislative  power  in  the  national  assemblies. 

In  the  middle  of  the  tenth  century,  however,  according  to 
Sismondi,  the  distinction  of  races  was  lost ;  none  were 
Goths,  or  Romans,  or  even  Franks,  but  Aquitanians,  Bur- 
gundians,  Flemings.  French  had  become  the  language  of 
the  nation  (iii.  400).  French  must  here  be  understood  to 
include  Provencal,  and  to  be  used  in  opposition  to  Ger- 
man. In  this  sense  the  assertion  seems  to  be  nearly  true ; 
and  it  may  naturally  have  been  the  consequence  that  all 
difference  of  personal  laws  had  come  to  an  end.  The  feudal 
customs,  the  local  usages  of  counties  and  fiefs,  took  as  much 
the  lead  in  northern  France  as  the  Roman  code  still  pre- 
served in  the  south.  The  pays  coiitumiers  separated  them- 
selves by  territorial  distinctions  from  the  pays  du  droit} 
Still  the  instance  quoted  in  my  note,  p.  134,  from  Vaissette 
(where,  at  Carcassonne,  so  late  as  918,  we  find  Roman, 
Goth,  and  Frank  judges  enumerated),  is  a  striking  evidence 

i  A  work  which  I  had  not  seen  when  code  had  "been  compiled  on   a  different 

this  note  was  written,  ''  Histoire  du  Droit  motive  or  leading  principle.    This  is  very 

Francais,"  by  M.  Laferriere(p.  85),  treats  much  what  took  place  in  England,  and 

at  some  length  the  origin  of  the  custom-  perhaps  more  rapidly,  in  the  twelfth  cen- 

ary  law  of  France. .  It  was  not,  in  any  tury ;  the  Norman  law,  with  its  feudal 

considerable  degree,  borrowed  from  the  principle,  replaced  the  Anglo-Saxon, 

barbaric  codes,  nor  greatly,  as  he  thinks,  But    a   Belgian   writer,   M.    Raepsaet 

from  the  Roman  law.     He  points  out  the  (Nouveaux  Memoires   de  l'Academie   de 

manifold  discrepancies  from  the  former  Bruxelles,  t.  iii.).  contends  that  the  Salio 

of  these.    But  these  codes  appear  to  have  and  Hipuarian  laws  had  authority  in  th« 

been  in  force  under  Charlemagne.     The  Netherlands,  down  to  the  thirteenth  cen 

feudal  customs,  which  became  the  sole  tury,  for  towns  and  for  alodial  proprie- 

law  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Loire,  he  tors.      We    find    lex    Salica   in    several 

refers   to  the   ninth   and  two  following  instruments:    Otho   of   Frisingen    says, 

centuries.     And  I  suppose  there  can  be  "  Lege  quae  Salica  usque  ad  haec  tern 

no   doubt  of    this.      The  spirit    of    the  pora   vocatur,    nobilissimos    Francorurn 

French    customs,   both    territorial    and  adhuc  uti."     But  this  must  have  bee» 

personal,   was   wholly  feudal;    the   Salic  chiefly  as  to  successions. 

VOL     1    —  M  19 


290  PROVINCIAL  GOVERNMENT.  Notes  to 

that,  even  far  to  the  south,  the  territorial  principle  had  not 
yet  wholly  subverted  those  privileges  of  races,  to  which  the 
barbarians,  and  also  the  Romans,  clung  as  honorably  dis- 
tinctive. 

It  is  only  by  the  force  of  very  natural  prejudices,  acting 
on  both  the  polished  and  the  uncivilized,  that  we  can 
account  for  the  long  continuance  of  this  inconvenient  sepa- 
ration. If  the  Franks  scorned  the  complex  and  wordy  juris- 
prudence of  Rome,  it  was  just  as  intolerable  for  a  Roman  to 
endure  the  rude  usages  of  a  German  tribe.  The  traditional 
glory  of  Rome,  transferred  by  the  adoption  of  that  name  to 
the  provincials,  consoled  them  in  their  subjection ;  and  in  the 
continuance  of  their  law,  in  the  knowledge  that  it  was  the 
guarantee  of  their  civil  rights  against  a  litigious  barbarian, 
though  it  might  afford  them  but  imperfect  security  against 
his  violence,  in  the  connection  which  it  strengthened  with 
the  Church  (for  churchmen  of  all  nations  followed  it), 
they  found  no  trifling  recommendations  of  this  distinction 
from  the  conquerors.  It  seems  to  be  proved  that,  in  lapse 
of  ages,  each  had  gradually  borrowed  something  from  the 
other.  The  melting  down  of  personal  into  territorial,  that 
is,  uniform  law,  as  it  cannot  be  referred  to  any  positive 
enactment  or  to  any  distinct  period,  seems  to  have  been  the 
result  of  such  a  process.  The  same  judges,  the  counts  and 
rnissi,  appear  to  have  decided  the  controversies  of  all  the 
subject  nations,  whether  among  themselves  or  one  with 
another.  Marculfus  tells  us  this  in  positive  terms :  "  Eos 
recto  tramite  secundum  legem  et  consuetudinem  eorun 
regas."  (Marculf.  Formulae,  lib.  i.  c.  8.)  Nor  do  we  find 
any  separate  judges,  except  the  defensor -es  of  cities,  who 
were  Romans,  but  had  only  a  limited  jurisdiction.  It  was 
only  as  to  civil  rights,  as  ought  to  be  remarked,  that  the  dis- 
tinction of  personal  law  was  maintained.  The  penalties  of 
crime  were  defined  by  a  law  of  the  state.  And  the  same 
must  of  course  be  understood  as  to  military  service 

Note  VI.     Pages  156,  164. 

The  German  dukes  of  the  Alemanni  and  Bavarians  be- 
longed to  once  royal  families:  their  hereditary  rights  may 
be  considered  as  those  of  territorial  chiefs.  Again,  in  Aqui- 
taine  the  Merovingian  kings  had  so  little  authority  that  the 


Chap.  II.  PROVINCIAL  GOVERNMENT.  291 

counts  became  nearly  independent.      But  we  do  not  find 
reason,  as  far  as  I  am  aware,  to  believe  any  regular  succes- 
sion of  a  son  to  his  father,  in  Neustria  or  Austrasia,  under 
the  first  dynasty :  much  less  would  Charlemagne  have  per- 
mitted it  to  grow  up.     It  could  never  have  become  an  estab- 
lished usage,  except  in  a  monarchy  too  weak  to  maintain 
<uiy  of  its  prerogatives.      Such  a  monarchy  was  that  of 
Charles  the  Bald.    I  have  said  that,  in  the  famous  capitulary 
of  Kiersi,  in  877,  the  succession  of  a  son  to  his  father  appear* 
to  be  recognized  as  a  known  usage.     M.  Fauriel,  on  the 
other  hand,  denies  that  this  capitulary  even  confirms  it  at  alL 
(Hist,  de  la  Gaule  Meridionale,  iv.  383.)     We  both,  there- 
fore, agree  against  the  current  of  French  writers  who  take 
this  for  the  epoch  of  hereditary  succession.     It  seems  evident 
to  me  that  an  usage,  sufficient,  in  common  parlance,  to  entitle 
the  son  to  receive  the  honor  which  his  father  had  held,  is 
implied  in  this  capitulary.     But  the  object  of  the  enactment 
was  to  provide  for  the  contingency  of  a  territorial  govern- 
ment becoming  vacant  by  death  during  the  intended  absence 
of  the  emperor  Charles  in  Italy ;  and  that  in  cases  only  where 
the  son  of  the  deceased  count  should  be  with  the  army,  or  in 
his  minority,  or  where  no  son  survived.     "  It  is  obvious," 
Palgrave  says,  "  that  the  law  relates  to  the  custody  of  the 
county  or  fief  during  the  interval  between  the  death  of  the 
father  and  the  investiture  of  the  heir."     (English  Common- 
wealth, 392.)     But  the  case  of  an  heir,  that  is,  a  son  —  for 
collateral  inheritance  is  excluded  by  the  terms  of  the  capitu- 
lary —  being  of  full  age  and  on  the  spot,  is  not  specially 
mentioned;  so  that  we  must  presume  that  he  would  have 
assumed  the  government  of  the  county,  awaiting  the  sover- 
eign's confirmation  on  his  return  from  the  Italian  expedition. 
The  capitulary  should  be  understood  as  applicable  to  tempo- 
rary circumstances,  rather  than  as  a  permanent  law.     But  I 
must  think  that  the  lineal  succession  is  taken  for  granted 
in  it.1 

i  Si  comes  obierit,  cujus  filius  nobis-  notitiam  perveniat.     Si  vero  filium  non 

cum  sit,  filius  noster  cum  cseteris  fide-  habuerit.  filius  noster  cum  caetens  fide- 

libus  nostris  ordinet  de  his  qui  illi  plus  libus  nostris  ordinet,   qui  cum    rnmis- 

familiares  et  propinquiores  fuerint,  qui  terialibus  ipsius    coinitatus  et   episcopo 

cum  ministerialibus  ipsius  comitatus  et  ipsum  comitatuin  prsevideat,  dcnec  jus- 

episcopo  ipsum    conlitatum    praevideat,  sio  nostra  inde  fiat.     Et  pro  hoc  nullus 

usque  cum  nobis  renuntietur.    Si  autem  iraseatur,  si  eundem  comitatum  alteri, 

filium  parvulum   habuerit,  iisdem   cum  qui  nobis    placuerit,   dederimus,   quain 

ministerialibus  ipsius  comitatus  et  epis-  illi  qui  earn  hactenus  praevidit.     Sural* 

copo,  in  cujus  p;trnohin  consistit,  eundem  ter  et  de  vassallis  nostris  faciendum  est 

comitatum  prsevideat.  donee  ad  nostraiu  (Script,  tier.  Gall.  vii.  701.* 


292  POWER  OF  THE   KINGS.  Nun;.-  p 

We  find  that  so  long  at  least  as  the  kings  retained  any 
power,  their  confirmation  or  consent  was  required  on  every 
succession  to  an  honor  —  that  is,  a  county  or  other  govern- 
ment —  though  it  \v;h  very  rarely  refused.  Guadet  (Notices 
sur  Richer,  p.  62)  supposes  this  to  have  been  the  case  even 
in  the  last  reigns  of  the  Caroline  family;  that  is,  in  the  tenth 
century;  but  this  is  doubtful,  at  least  as  to  the  southern 
dukes  and  counts.  These  honors  gradually,  after  the  acces- 
sion of  the  house  of  Capet,  assumed  a  new  character,  and 
were  confounded  together  with  benefices  under  the  general 
name  of  fiefs  of  the  crown.  The  counts,  indeed,  according 
to  Montesquieu  and  to  probability,  held  beneficiary  lands 
attached  to  their  office.     (Esprit  des  Loix,  xxvi.  27.) 

The  count)-,  it  may  here  be  mentioned,  was  a  territorial 
division,  generally  of  the  same  extent  as  the  pagus  of  the 
Roman  empire.  The  latter  appellation  is  used  in  the  Mero- 
vingian period,  and  long  afterwards.  The  word  county, 
comitatus,  is  said  to  be  rare  before  800 ;  but  the  royal  officer 
was  called  comes  from  the  beginning.  The  number  of  pagi, 
or  counties,  I  have  not  found.  The  episcopal  dioceses  were 
118  in  the  Caroline  period,  and  were  frequently,  but  not 
always,  coincident  in  extent  with  the  civil  divisions.  (See 
Guerard,  Cartulaire  de  Chartres,  Prolegomenes,  p.  6,  in 
Documens  Inedits,  1840.) 


Note  VII.     Page  158. 

A  reconsideration  of  the  Merovingian  history  has  led  ims 
to  doubt  whether  I  may  not,  in  my  earlier  editions,  like  sev- 
eral others,  have  rather  exaggerated  the  change  in  the  pre- 
rogative of  the  French  kings  from  Clovis  to  Clotaire  II. 
Though  the  famous  story  of  the  vase  of  Soissons  is  not 
insignificant,  it  now  seems  to  me  that  an  excessive  stress  has 
sometimes  been  laid  upon  it.  In  the  first  place,  there  is  a 
general  objection  to  founding  a  large  political  theory  on  any 
anecdote,  which  proving  false,  the  whole  would  crumble  for 
want  of  a  basis.  This,  however,  is  rather  a  general  remark 
than  intended  to  throw  doubt  upon  the  story  told  by  Gregory 
of  Tours,  who,  though  he  came  so  long  afterwards,  and 
though  there  is  every  appearance  of  rhetorical  exaggeration 
and  inexactness  in  the  detail,  is  likely  to  have  learned  the 


Chap.  II  POWER  OF  THE   KINGS.  295 

principal  fact  by  tradition  or  some  lost  authority.1  But  even 
taking  the  circumstances  exactly  according  to  his  relation,  dc 
they  go  much  further  than  to  inform  us,  what  our  knowledge 
of  barbarian  manners  might  lead  any  one  to  presume,  that 
the  booty  obtained  by  a  victory  was  divided  among  the  army  ? 
Clovis  was  not  refused  the  vase  which  he  requested;  the 
army  gave  their  assent  in  terms  which  Gregory,  we  may 
well  believe,  has  made  too  submissive ;  he  took  it  without 
regard  to  the  insolence  of  a  single  soldier,  and  revenged 
himself  on  the  first  opportunity.  The  Salian  king  was,  1 
believe  from  other  evidence,  a  limited  one;  he  was  obliged 
to  consult  his  army  in  war,  his  chief  men  in  peace ;  but  the 
vase  of  Soissons  does  not  seem  to  warrant  us  in  deeming 
him  to  have  been  more  limited  than  from  history  and  anal- 
ogy we  should  otherwise  infer.  If,  indeed,  the  language  of 
Gregory  were  to  be  trusted,  the  whole  result  would  tell  more 
in  favor  of  the  royal  authority  than  against  it.  And  thus 
Dubos,  who  has  written  on  the  principle  of  believing  all  that 
he  found  in  history  to  the  very  letter,  has  interpreted  the 
story. 

Two  French  writers,  the  latter  of  considerable  reputation, 
Boulainvilliers  and  Mably,  have  contributed  to  render  current 
a  notion  that  the  barbarian  kings,  before  the  conquest  of 
Gaul,  enjoyed  scarcely  any  authority  beyond  that  of  leaders 
of  the  army.  And  this  theory  has  lately  been  maintained 
by  two  of  our  countrymen,  whose  researches  have  met  with 
great  approbation.  "  It  is  plain,"  says  Mr.  Allen,  "  the  mon- 
archical theory  cannot  have  been  derived  from  the  ancient 
Germans.  In  the  most  considerable  of  the  German  tribes 
the  form  of  government  was  republican.  Some  of  them  had 
a  chief,  whom  the  Romans  designated  with  the  appellation 
of  king ;  but  his  authority  was  limited,  and  in  the  most  dis- 
tinguished of  their  tribes  the  name  as  well  as  the  office  of 
king  was  unknown.2     The  supreme  authority  of  the  nation 

i  Since  this    sentence   was  written  I  Gregory  of  Tours  has  recorded  concern- 

hare  found  the  story  of  the  vase  of  Sois-  ing  the  founder  of  the  monarchy ;  very 

sons    in    Uincmar's   Life  of   St.    Ilemi,  rhetorical,  and  probably    not  accurate, 

which,  as  I  have  observed  in  a  former  but  essentially  deserving  belief, 

note,  appears  to  be  taken  from  a  docu-  °-  This  is  by  no  means  an  unquestion- 

ment  nearlv  contemporary  with  the  saint,  able  representation  ot  what  Tacitus  hai 

that  is,  with  Clovis.     And  this  original  said;  but  the  language oi  that  historian, 

Life  of  St.  Kemi,  preserved  onlv  in  ex-  as  has  been  observed  in  a  former  note,  is" 

tracts  when  Ilincmar  compiled  his  own  not  sufficiently  perspicuous  on  this  suh 

oiography  of  that  famous  bishop,  is,  in  ject  of  German  royalty, 
all    likelihood,    the    basis    of    whatever 


294  POWER  OF  THE  KINGS.  Notes  to 

resided  in  the  freemen  of  whom  it  was  composed.  From 
them  every  determination  proceeded  which  affected  the  gen- 
eral interests  of  the  community,  or  decided  the  life  or  death 
of  any  member  of  the  commonwealth.  The  territory  of  the 
state  was  divided  into  districts,  and  in  every  district  there 
was  a  chief  who  presided  in  its  assemblies,  and,  with  the 
assistance  of  the  other  freemen,  regulated  its  internal  con- 
cerns, and  in  matters  of  inferior  importance  administered 
justice  to  the  inhabitants. 

This  form  of  government  subsisted  among  the  Saxons  of 
the  Continent  so  late  as  the  close  of  the  seventh  century,  am? 
probably  continued  in  existence  till  their  final  conquest  by 
Charlemagne.  Long  before  that  period,  however,  the  tribes 
that  quitted  their  native  forests,  and  established  themselves 
in  the  empire,  had  converted  the  temporary  general  of  their 
army  into  a  permanent  magistrate,  with  the  title  of  king. 
But  that  the  person  decorated  with  this  appellation  was  in- 
vested with  the  attributes  essential  to  royalty  in  after-times  is 
utterly  incredible.  Freemen  with  arms  in  their  hands,  accus- 
tomed to  participate  in  the  exercise  of  the  sovereign  power, 
were  not  likely  without  cause  to  divest  themselves  of  that 
high  prerogative,  and  transfer  it  totally  and  inalienably  to 
their  general.  Chiefs  who  had  been  recently  his  equals 
might,  in  consideration  ot  his  military  talents,  and  from  re- 
gard tp  their  common  interest,  acquiesce  in  his  permanent 
superiority  as  commander  of  their  united  forces  ;  but  it  can- 
not be  supposed  that  they  would  gratuitously  and  universally 
submit  to  him  as  their  master.  There  are  no  written  ac- 
counts, it  is  true,  of  the.  conditions  stipulated  by  the  German 
warriors  when  they  converted  him  into  a  king.  But  there  is 
abundance  of  facts  recorded  by  historians,  which  show  be- 
yond a  doubt  that,  though  he  might  occasionally  abuse  his 
power  by  acts  of  violence  and  injustice,  the  authority  he  pos- 
sessed by  law  was  far  from  being  unlimited.  (Inquiry  into 
the  Rise  and  Growth  of  Royal  Prerogative,  p.  11.) 

It  may  be  observed,  in  the  first  place,  that  Mr.  Allen  ap- 
peared to  have  combated  a  shadow.  Few,  I  presume,  contend 
for  an  unlimited  authority  of  the  Germanic  kings,  either  be- 
fore or  after  their  conquests  of  France  and  England.  A 
despotic  monarchy  was  utterly  uncongenial  to  the  mediaeval 
polity.     Sir  F.  Palgrave  follows  in  the  same  direction  :  — 

"  When  the  '  three  tribes  of  Germany '  first  invaded  Brit- 


Chap.  II.  POWER  OF  THE  KINGS.  295 

ain,  royalty,  in  our  sense  of  the  term,  was  unknown  to  them. 
Amongst  the  Teutons  in  general  the  word  '  king,'  probably 
borrowed  from  the  Celtic  tongue,  though  now  naturalized  in  all 
the  Teutonic  languages,  was  as  yet  not  introduced  or  invented. 
Their  patriarchal  rulers  were  their  'aldermen,'  or  seniors. 
In  '  old  Saxony  '  there  was  such  an  alderman  in  every  pagus. 
Predominant  or  preeminent  chieftains,  whom  the  Romans 
called  'reges,'  and  who  were  often  confirmed  in  their  domin- 
ions by  the  Romans  themselves,  existed  at  an  earlier  period 
amongst  several  of  the  German  tribes  ;  but  it  must  not  be 
supposed  that  these  leaders  possessed  any  of  the  exalted 
functions  and  complex  attributes  which,  according  to  our 
ideas,  constitute  royal  dignity.  A  king  must  be  invested 
with  permanent  and  paramount  authority.  For  the  material 
points  at  issue  are  not  affected  by  showing  that  one  powerful 
chieftain  might  receive  the  complimentary  title  of  rex  from  a 
foreign  power,  or  that  another  chieftain,  with  powers  ap- 
proaching to  royalty,  may  not  have  been  created  occasionally, 
and  during  greater  emergencies.  The  real  question  is, 
whether  the  king  had  become  the  lord  of  the  soil,  or  at  least 
the  greatest  landed  proprietor,  and  the  first  '  estate '  of  the 
commonwealth,  endued  with  prerogatives  which  no  other 
member  of  the  community  could  claim  or  exercise.  The  dis- 
posal of  the  military  force,  the  supreme  administration  of 
justice,  the  right  of  receiving  taxes  and  tributes,  and  the 
character  of  supreme  legislator  and  perpetual  president  of 
the  councils  of  the  realm,  must  all  belong  to  the  sovereign, 
if  he  is  to  be  king  in  deed  as  well  as  in  name."  (Rise  and 
Progress  of  the  English  Commonwealth,  vol.  i.  p.  553.) 

The  prerogatives  here  assigned  to  royalty  as  part  of  its 
definition  are  of  so  various  a  nature,  and  so  indefinitely  ex- 
pressed, that  it  is  difficult  to  argue  about  them.  Certainly  a 
"  king  in  deed  "  must  receive  taxes,  and  dispose,  though  not 
necessarily  without  consent,  of  the  military  force.  He  must 
preside  in  the  councils  of  the  realm ;  but  he  need  not  be  su- 
preme legislator,  if  that  is  meant  to  exclude  the  participation 
of  his  subjects ;  much  less  need  he  be  the  lord  of  the  soil  — 
a  very  modern  notion,  and  merely  technical,  if  indeed  it 
could  be  said  to  be  true  in  any  proper  sense  —  nor  even  the 
greatest  landed  proprietor.  "  A  king's  a  king  for  a'  that ;  " 
nnd  we  have  never  in  England  known  any  other. 

But  why  do  these  eminent  writers  depreciate  so  confidently 


296  POWER  OF  THE   KINGS.  Note*  10 

the  powers  of  a  Frank  or  Saxon  king  ?     Even  if  Crcsar  and 

Tacitus  are  to  be  implicitly  confided  in  for  their  own  times, 
are  we  to  infer  that  no  consolidation  of  the  German  clans,  if 
that  word  is  a  right  one,  had  been  effected  in  the  four  suc- 
ceeding centuries?  Are  we  even  to  reject  the  numerous  tes- 
timonies of  Latin  writers  during  those  ages,  who  speak  of 
kings,  hereditary  chieftains,  and  leaders  of  the  barbarian 
armies  ?  If  there  is  a  notorious  fact,  both  as  to  the  Salian 
Franks  and  the  Saxons  of  Germany,  it  is  that  each  had  an 
acknowledged  royal  family.  Even  if  they  sometimes  chose 
a  king  not  according  to  our  rules  of  descent,  it  was  invaria- 
bly from  one  ancestor.  The  house  of  Meroveus  was  proba- 
bly recognized  before  the  existence  of  that  obscure  prince ; 
and  in  England  Hengist  could  boast  the  blood  of  Woden,  the 
demigod  of  heroic  tradition.  A  government  by  grafs  or  eal- 
dormen  of  the  gau,  might  suit  a  people  whose  forests  pro- 
tected them  from  invasion,  but  was  utterly  incompatible  with 
the  aggressive  warfare  of  the  Franks,  or  of  the  first  conquer- 
ors of  Kent  and  Wessex.  Grimm,  in  his  excellent  antiquities 
of  German  Law,  has  fully  treated  of  the  old  Teutonic  monar- 
chies, not  always  hereditary,  and  never  absolute,  but  easily 
capable  of  receiving  an  enlargement  of  power  in  the  hands 
of  brave  and  ambitious  princes,  such  as  arose  in  the  great 
westward  movement  of  Germany. 

If,  however,  the  authority  of  Clovis  has  been  rated  too 
low,  it  may  also  be  questioned  whether  that  of  the  next  two 
generations,  his  sons  and  grandsons,  has  not  been  exaggerated 
in  contrast.  It  is  certainly  true  that  Gregory  of  Tours  ex- 
hibits a  picture  of  savage  tyranny  in  several  of  these  sover- 
eigns. But  we  are  to  remember  that  particular  acts  of  arbi- 
trary power,  and  especially  the  putting  obnoxious  persons  to 
death,  were  so  congenial  to  the  whole  manners  of  the  age, 
that  they  do  not  prove  the  question  at  issue,  whether  the  gov- 
ernment may  be  called  virtually  an  absolute  monarchy.  Ev- 
ery Frank  of  wealth  and  courage  was  a  despot  within  his 
sphere ;  but  his  sphere  of  power  was  a  bounded  one ;  and  so, 
too,  might  be  that  of  the  king.  Probably  when  Gontran  or 
Fredegonde  ordered  a  turbulent  chief  to  be  assassinated,  no 
weregild  was  paid  to  his  kindred  ;  but  his  death  would  excite 
hardly  any  disapprobation,  except  among  those  who  thought 
it  undeserved. 

Gregory  of  Tours,  it  should  be  kept  in  mind,  was  a  Ro- 


Chat.  II.  POWER  OF  THE  KINGS.  29? 

roan  ;  he  does  not  always  distinguish  the  two  nations  ;  but  a 
great  part  of  the  general  oppression  which  we  find  under  the 
grandchildren  of  Clovis  seems  to  have  fallen  on  the  subject 
people.  As  to  these,  few  are  inclined  to  doubt  that  the  king 
was  truly  absolute.  The  most  remarkable  instances  of  arbi- 
trary power  exerted  upon  the  Franks  are  in  the  imposition  of 
taxes.  These,  as  has  been  said  in  another  note,  were  repug 
nant  to  the  whole  genius  of  barbarian  society.  We  find 
however,  that  on  the  death  of  Theodebert,  king  of  Austrasia. 
in  547,  the  Franks  murdered  one  Parthenius,  evidently  a 
Roman,  and  a  minister  of  the  late  king  —  "  pro  eo  quod  iis 
tributa  antedicti  regis  tempore  inflixesset."  (Greg.  Tur.  lib. 
hi.  c.  36.)  Whether  these  tributes  continued  afterwards  to 
be  paid  we  do  not  read.  Chilperic,.  the  most  oppressive  of 
his  line,  at  a  later  period,  in  579,  laid  a  tax  on  freehold  lands 
—  "  ut  possessor  de  terra  propria  amphoram  vini  per  aripen- 
nem  redderet."  (Id.  lib.  v  c.  29.)  It  is,  indeed,  possible 
that  this  affected  only  the  Romans,  though  the  language  of 
the  historian  is  general  —  "  descriptiones  novas  et  graves  in 
omni  regno  suo  fieri  jussit."  A  revolt  broke  out  in  conse- 
quence at  Limoges  ;  but  the  inhabitants  of  that  city  were 
Roman.  Chilperic  put  this  down  by  the  help  of  his  faithful 
Antrustions  —  "  unde  multum  molestus  rex,  dirigens  de  latere 
suo  personas,  immensis  damnis  populum  afflixit,  suppliciisque 
conterruit."  Mr.  Spence  (Laws  of  Modern  Europe,  p.  2G9) 
is  clearly  of  opinion,  against  Montesquieu,  who  confines  this 
tax  to  the  Romans,  that  it  comprehended  the  Franks  also,  and 
was  in  the  nature  of  the  indiction,  or  land-tax,  imposed  on  the 
subjects  of  the  Roman  empire  by  an  assessment  renewed 
every  fifteen  years ;  and  this,  perhaps,  on  the  whole,  is  the 
more  probable  hypothesis  of  the  two.  Mr.  S.  says  (p.  267) 
that  lands  subject  to  tribute  still  continued  liable  when  in 
the  possession  of  a  Frank.  This  is  possible,  but  he  refers  to 
texts  which  do  not  prove  it. 

The  next  passage  which  I  shall  quote  is  more  unequivocal. 
The  death  of  Chilperic  exposed  his  instruments  of  tyranny, 
as  it  had  Parthenius  in  Austrasia,  to  the  vengeance  of  an  op- 
pressed people.  Fredegonde,  though  she  escaped  condign 
punishment  herself,  could  not  screen  these  vile  ministers :  — 
"  Habebat  tunc  temporis  secum  Audonem  judicem,  qui  ei 
tempore  regis  in  multis  consenserat  malis.  Ip:>e  enim  cum 
Mummolo  prsefecto  multos  de  Francis,  qui  tempore  Childe- 


29.8  POWER  OF  THE  KINGS.  Notks  to 

berti  regis  senioris  ingenui  fuerant,  publico  tributo  subegit 
Qui,  post  mortem  regis  Chilperici,  ab  ipsis  spoilatus  ac 
denudatus  est,  ut  nihil  ei,  praeter  quod  super  se  auferre  potuit, 
rcmaneret.  Domos  enim  ejus  incendio  subdiderunt ;  abstulis- 
sent  utique  et  ipsam  vitam,  ni  cum  regina  ecclesiam  expetis- 
set."  (Lib.  vii.  c.  15.)  The  word  ingenui,  in  the  above 
passage,  means  the  superior  class  —  alodial  landholders  or 
beneficiaries,  as  distinguished  from  the  class  named  Udi,  who 
are  also  perhaps  sometimes  called  tributarii,  as  well  as  the 
Romans,  and  from  whom  a  public  census,  as  some  think,  was 
due.  "We  may  remark  here,  that  the  removing  of  a  number 
of  Franks  from  their  own  place  as  ingenui,  to  that  of  tribu- 
taries, was  a  particular  act  of  oppression,  and  does  not  stand 
quite  on  the  footing  of  ^a  general  law.  The  passage  in  Greg- 
ory is  chiefly  important  as  it  shows  that  the  ingenui  were  not 
legally  subject  to  public  tribute. 

M.  Guizot  has  adduced  a  constitution  of  Clotaire  II.  in 
615,  as  a  proof  that  endeavors  had  been  made  by  the  kings 
to  impose  undue  taxes.  This  contains  the  following  article : 
u  Ut  ubicunque  census  novus  impie  additus  est,  et  a  populo 
reclamatur,  justa  inquisitione  misericorditer  emendetur."  (C. 
8.)  But  does  this  warrant  the  inference  that  any  tax  had 
been  imposed  on  the  free-born  Frank?  "  Census  "  is  gener- 
ally understood  to  be  the  capitation  paid  by  the  tributarily 
and  the  words  imply  a  local  exaction  rather  than  a  nai  Dnal 
imposition  by  the  royal  authority.  It  is  not  even  manifest  that 
this  provision  was  founded  exclusively  on  any  oppression  of 
me  crown  ;  several  other  articles  in  this  celebrated  law  are 
extensively  remedial,  and  forbid  all  undue  spoliation  of  the 
weak.  But  if  we  should  incline  to  Guizot's  interpretation,  it 
will  not  prove,  of  course,  the  right  of  the  kings  to  impose 
taxes  on  the  Franks,  since  that  to  which  it  adverts  is  called 
census  novus  impie  additus. 

The  inference  which  I  formerly  drew  from  the  language 
of  the  laws  is  inconclusive.  Bouquet,  in  the  Recueil  des 
Ilistoriens  (vol.  iv.),  admits  only  seven  laws  during  the  Mer- 
ovingian period,  differing  from  Baluze  as  to  the  particu- 
lar sovereigns  by  whom  several  of  them  were  enacted.  Of 
these  the  first  is  by  Childebert  I.,  king  of  Paris,  in  532,  ac- 
cording to  him ;  by  Childebert  IT.  of  Australia  according 
**  Baluze,  which,  as  the  date  is  Cologne,  and  several  Aus- 
tralian cities  are  mentioned  in  it  which  never  belonged  to  the 


Chap.  II.  POWER  OF  THE  KINGS.  299 

first  Childebert,  I  cannot  but  think  more  likely.  This  con- 
stitution has  una  cum  nostris  optimatibus,  and  convenit  una 
leudis  nostris.  And  the  expressions  lead  to  two  inferences ; 
first,  that  the  assembly  of  the  field  of  March  was,  in  that  age, 
annually  held ;  secondly,  that  it  was  customary  to  send  round 
to  the  people  the  determinations  of  the  optimates  in  this 
council :  —  "  Cum  nos  omnes  calendas  Martias  de  quascunque 
conditiones  una  cum  optimatibus  nostris  pertractavimus,  ad 
unumquemque  notitiam  volumus  pervenire."  The  grammar 
is  wretched,  but  such  is  the  evident  sense. 

The  second  law,  as  it  is  called,  is  an  agreement  between 
Childebert  and  Clotaire  ;  the  first  of  each  name  according  to 
Bouquet,  the  second  according  to  Baluze.  This  wants  all 
enacting  words  except  "  Decretum  est."  The  third  is  an  or- 
dinance of  Childebert  for  abolishing  idolatrous  rites  and  keep- 
ing festivals.  It  is  an  enforcement  of  ecclesiastical  regula- 
tions, not  perhaps  reckoned  at  that  time  to  require  legislative 
sanction.  The  fourth,  of  Clotaire  I.  or  Clotaire  II.,  begins 
"  Decretum  est,"  and  has  no  other  word  of  enactment.  But 
this  does  not  exclude  the  probability  of  consent  by  the 
leudes.  Clotaire  I.,  in  another  constitution,  speaks  authori- 
tatively. But  it  will  be  found,  on  reading  it,  that  none  ex- 
cept his  Roman  subjects  are  concerned.  The  sixth  is  merely 
a  precept  of  Gontran,  directed  to  the  bishops  and  judges,  en- 
joining them  to  maintain  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  day 
and  other  feasts.  The  last  is  the  edict  of  Clotaire  II.  in 
615,  already  quoted,  and  here  we  read,  — "  Hanc  delibera- 
tionem  quam  cum  pontificibus  vel  tarn  magnis  viris  optimati- 
bus, aut  fidelibus  nostris  in  synodali  concilio  instituimus." 

After  615  no  law  is  extant  enacted  in  any  of  the  Frank 
kingdoms  before  the  reign  of  Pepin.  This,  however,  cannot 
of  itself  warrant  the  assertion  that  none  were  enacted  which 
do  not  remain.  It  is  more  surprising,  perhaps,  that  even  a 
few  have  been  preserved.  The  language  of  Childebert 
above  cited  leads  to  the  belief  that,  in  the  sixth  century, 
whatever  we  may  suppose  as  to  the  next,  an  assembly  with 
powers  of  legislation  was  regularly  held  by  the  Frank  sov- 
ereigns. Nothing,  on  the  whole,  warrants  the  supposition 
that  the  three  generations  after  Clovis  possessed  an  acknowl- 
edged right,  either  of  legislating  for  their  Frank  subjects,  or 
imposing  taxes  upon  them.  But  after  the  assassination  of 
Sigebert,  under  the  walls  of  Tournay.  in  575,  the  Austrasian 


300  FRENCH    NOBILU'7.  Notes  to 

nobles  began  to  display  i  >ieady  resistance  to  the  authority 
which  his  widow  BruncLaut  endeavored  to  exercise  in  her 
son's  name.  This,  aftei  forty  years  terminated  in  her  death, 
and  in  the  reunion  of  the  Frank  monarchy,  with  a  much 
more  aristocratic  charade »  than  before,  under  the  second 
Clot  aire.  It  is  a  revolutioi  x  which  we  have  already  drawn 
attention  hi  the  note  on  Bnnehaut. 


Note  VIII.     Page  160. 

••  The  existence,"  says  Savigny,  "  of  an  original  nobility, 
as  a  particular  patrician  order,  and  not  as  a  class  indefinitely 
distinguished  by  their  wealth  and  nobility,  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned. It  is  difficult  to  say  from  what  origin  this  distinction 
may  have  proceeded ;  whether  it  was  connected  with  the 
services  of  religion,  or  with  the  possession  of  the  heritable 
offices  of  counts.  We  may  affirm,  however,  with  certainty, 
that  the  honor  enjoyed  was  merely  personal,  and  conferred 
no  preponderance  in  the  political  or  judicial  systems."  (Ch. 
iv.  p.  172,  English  translation.)  This  admits  all  the  theory 
to  which  I  have  inclined  in  the  text,  namely,  the  non-exist- 
ence of  a  privileged  order,  though  antiquity  of  family  was 
in  high  respect.  The  eorl  of  Anglo-Saxon  law  was,  it  may 
be  said,  distinguished  by  certain  privileges  from  the  ceorl. 
Why  could  not  the  same  have  been  the  case  with  the 
Franks  ?  We  may  answer  that  it  is  by  the  laws  and  records 
of  those  times  that  we  prove  the  former  distinction  in  Eng 
land,  and  it  is  by  the  absence  of  all  such  proof  that  the  non 
existence  of  such  a  distinction  in  France  lias  been  presumed 
But  if  the  lidi,  of  whom  we  so  often  read,  were  Franks  by 
origin,  and  moreover  personally  free,  which,  to  a  certain  ex- 
tent, we  need  not  deny,  they  will  be  the  corresponding  rank 
to  the  Anglo-Saxon  ceorl,  superior,  as,  from  whatever  cir- 
cumstances, the  latter  may  have  been  in  his  social  degree. 
All  the  Franci  ingenui  will  thus  have  constituted  a  class  of 
nobility  ;  in  no  other  sense,  however,  than  all  men  of  white 
race  constitute  such  a  class  in  those  of  the  United  States 
where  slavery  is  abolished,  which  is  not  what  we  usually  mean 
by  the  word.  In  some  German  nations  we  have,  indeed,  a 
distinct  nobility  of  blood.  The  Bavarians  had  five  families, 
for  the  death  of  a  member  of  whom   a  double  composition 


Chap.  IJ.  FRENCH  NOBILITY.  301 

was  paid.  They  had  one,  the  Agilolfungi,  whose  composition 
was  fourfold.  TYoja  also  finds  proof  of  two  classes  among 
the  Alemanns  (v.  168).  But  we  are  speaking  only  of  the 
Franks,  a  cognate  people,  indeed,  to  the  Saxons  and  Ale- 
manns, but  not  the  same,  and  whose  origin  is  not  that  of  a 
pure  single  tribe.  The  Franks  were  collectively  like  a  new 
people  in  comparison  with  some  others  of  Teutonic  blood.  It 
does  not,  therefore,  appear  to  mc  sc  unquestionable  as  to  Sa- 
vigny  that  a  considerable  number  of  families  formed  a  patri- 
cian order  in  the  French  monarchy,  without  reference  to  he- 
reditary possessions  or  hereditary  office. 

A  writer  of  considerable  learning  and  ingenuity,  but  not 
always  attentive  to  the  strict  meaning  of  what  he  quotes,  has 
found  a  proof  of  family  precedence  among  the  Franks  in  the 
words  crinosus  and  erinitus,  employed  in  the  Salic  law  and 
in  an  edict  of  Childebert.  (Meyer,  Institut.  Judieiaires,  vol. 
i.  p.  104.)  This  privilege  of  wearing  long  hair  he  supposes 
peculiar  to  certain  families,  and  observes  that  crinosus  is  op- 
posed to  tonsoratus.  But  why  should  we  not  believe  that  all 
superior  freemen,  that  is,  all  Frank-,  whose  composition  was 
cf  two  hundred  solidi,  wore  this  long  hair,  though  it  might  be 
an  honor  denied  to  the  lidi?  Gibert,  in  a  memoir  on  the 
Merovingians  (Acad,  des  Inscript.  xxx.  583),  quotes  a  pas- 
sage of  Tacitus,  concerning  the  maimer  in  which  the  nation 
of  the  Suevi  wore  their  hair,  from  whom  the  Franks  are  sup- 
posed by  him  to  be  descended.  And  there  is  at  least  some- 
thing remarkable  in  the  language  of  Tacitus,  which  indicates 
a  distinction  between  the  royal  family  and  other  freemen,  as 
well  as  between  these  and  the  servile  class.  The  words  have 
not  been,  I  think,  often  quoted:  —  "Nuncde  Sin-vis  dicen- 
dum  est,  quorum  non  una  ut  Cattorum  Tencterorumque  gens ; 
majorem  enim  Germanise  partem  obtinent,  propriis  adhuc  na- 
tionibus  discreti,  quamquam  in  communi  Suevi  dicuntur. 
Insigne  gentis  obliquare  crinem,  nodoque  substringerc.  Sic 
Suevi  a  caeteris  Germanis,  sic  Sucvorum  ingenui  a  servis 
separantur.  In  aliis  gentibus,  seu  cognatione  aliqua  Suevo- 
rum,  seu,  quod  accidit,  imitatione,  rarum  et  intra  juventae  spa- 
tium,  apud  Suevos  usque  ad  canitiem,  horrentem  capillum 
retro  sequuntur,  ac  sajpe  in  ipso  solo  vertice  religanl  ;  prin- 
cipes  et  omatiorem  habeut."  (De  Mor.  German,  c.  38.)  This 
last  expression  may  account  for  the  word  erinitus  being  some- 
times applied   to  the    royal  family,   as   it    were   exclusively, 


302  FRENCH  NOBILITY.  Notes  10 

sometimes  to  the  Frank  nation  or  its  freemen.1  The  refer- 
ences of  M.  Meyer  are  so  far  from  sustaining  his  theory  that 
they  rather  lead  me  to  an  opposite  conclusion. 

M.  Naudet  (in  Me  moires  de  l'Academie  des  Inscriptions, 
Nouvelle  Serie,  vol.  viii.  p.  502)  enters  upon  an  elaborate  dis- 
cussion of  the  state  of  persons  under  the  first  dynasty.  He 
distinguishes,  of  course,  the  ingenui  from  the  lidi.  But 
among  the  former  he  conceives  that  there  were  two  classes  : 
the  former  absolutely  free  as  to  their  persons,  valued  in  their 
weregild  at  200  solidi,  meeting  in  the  county  mallus,  and 
sometimes  in  the  national  assembly,  —  in  a  word,  the  populus 
of  the  Frank  monarchy ;  the  latter  valued,  as  he  supposes,  at 
1 00  solidi,  living  under  the  protection  or  mundeburde  of  some 
rich  man,  and  though  still  free,  and  said  to  be  ingenuili 
ordirie  servientes,  not  very  distinguishable  at  present  from  the 
lidi.  I  do  not  know  that  this  theory  has  been  countenanced 
by  other  writers.  But  even  if  we  admit  it,  the  higher  class 
could  net  properly  be  denominated  an  hereditary  nobility ; 
their  privileges  would  be  those  of  better  fortune,  which  had 
rescued  them  from  the  dependence  into  which,  from  one  cause 
or  another,  their  fellow-citizens  had  fallen.  The  Franks  in 
general  are  called  by  Guizot  une  noblesse  en  decadence  ;  the 
leudes  one  en  progres.  But  he  maintains  that  from  the  fifth 
to  the  eleventh  age  there  existed  no  real  nobility  of  birth. 
In  this,  however,  he  goes  much  further  than  Mably,  who  does 
not  scruple  to  admit  an  hereditary  nobility  in  the  time  of 
Charlemagne,  and  probably  further  than  can  be  reasonably 
allowed,  especially  if  the  eleventh  century  is  to  be  understood 
inclusively.  In  that  century  we  shall  see  that  the  nobles 
formed  a  distinct  order ;  and  I  am  much  inclined  to  believe 
that  this  was  the  case  as  soon  as  feudal  tenure  became  gen- 
eral, which  was  at  least  as  early  as  the  tenth. 

M.  Lehuerou  denies  any  hereditary  nobility  during  the 
Merovingian  period,  at  least,  of  French  history  :  "  II  n'exis- 
tait  done  point  de  noblesse  dans  le  sens  moderne  du  mot, 
puisqu'il  n'y  avait  point  d'heredite,  et  puisque  l'heredite,  si 
elle  se  produisait  quelquefois,  etait   purement  accidentelle ; 

1  The  royal  family  seem  also  to  have  de  his  fieri  debeat ;  et  utrum  incisa  cae- 

worn  longer  hair  than  the  others.     Chil-  sarie,    ut    reliqua   plebs    habeantur,   an 

debert  proposed  to  Clotaire,  as  we  read  certe  his  interfectis  regnuin  gerruani  nos- 

In   Gregory  of  Tours  (iii.  18),  that   the  tri  inter  nosmetipsos  aequ&litate  habita 

children  of  their  brother  Clodimer  should  dividatur." 
be  either  cropped  or  put  to  death  :  "  quid 


Chap.  II.  BENEFICES.  H03 

mais  il  y  avait  une  aristocratie  mobile,  change  ante,  variable 
au  gre  des  accidents  et  des  caprices  de  la  vie  barbare,  e1 
neannioins  en  possession  de  veritables  privileges  qu'il  faut  se 
garder  de  meconnaitre.  Cette  aristocratie  etait  plutot  celle 
des  titres,  des  places,  et  des  honneurs.  que  celle  de  la  nais- 
sance,  quoique  celle-ci  n'y  fut  pas  etrangere.  Elle  etait  plus 
dans  le  present,  et  moms  dans  le  passe  ;  elle  empruntait  plus 
a  la  puissance  actuelie  qu'a  celle  des  souvenirs  ;  mais  elle 
ne  s'en  detachait  pas  moins  nettement  des  couches  inferieures 
de  la  population,  et  notamment  de  la  foule  de  ceux  dont  la 
noblesse  ne  consistait  aue  dans  leur  ingenuite."  (Inst.  Caro 
ling.  p.  452.) 

Note  IX.     Page  162. 

The  nature  of  benefices  has  been  very  well  discussed, 
like  everything  else,  by  M.  Guizot,  in  his  Essai  sur  l'Hist. 
de  France,  p.  120.  He  agrees  with  me  in  the  two  main 
positions  —  that  benefices,  considered  generally,  never  passed 
through  the  supposed  stage  of  grants  revocable  at  pleasure, 
and  that  they  were  sometimes  granted  in  inheritance  from 
the  sixth  century  downwards.  This,  however,  was  rather  the 
exception,  he  supposes,  than  the  rule.  "  We  cannot  doubt 
that,  under  Charlemagne,  most  benefices  were  granted  only 
for  life"  (p.  140).  Louis  the  Debonair  endeavored  to  act  on 
the  same  policy,  but  his  efforts  were  unsuccessful.  Heredi- 
tary grants  became  the  rule,  as  is  proved  by  many  charters 
of  his  own  and  Charles  the  Bald.  Finally  he  tells  us,  the 
latter  prince,  in  877,  empowered  his  Jideles  to  dispose  of  their 
benefices  as  they  thought  fit,  provided  it  were  to  persons  capa- 
ble of  serving  the  estate.  But  this  is  too  largely  expressed ; 
the  power  given  is  to  those  vassals  who  might  desire  to  take 
up  their  abode  in  a  cloister ;  and  it  could  only  be  exercised 
in  favor  of  a  son  or  other  kinsman.1  But  the  right  of  in- 
heritance had  probably  been  established  before.  Still,  so 
deeply  was  the  notion  of  a  personal  relation  to  the  grantor 
implanted  in  the  minds  of  men,  that  it  was  common,  notwith- 
standing the  largest  terms  of  inheritance  in  a  grant,  for  the 
new  tenant  to  obtain  a  confirmation  from  the  crown.     This 

1  Si  aliquis  ex  fidelibus  nostris  post  qui  reipublicae  prodesse  valeat,  auos  ho- 

obitum   nostrum,  Dei   et   nostro  amore  nores  prout  melius  voluerit  ei  valeat  pl» 

compunctus, -;eculo  renuntiare  voluerit,  citare.—  Script.  Her.  Gall.  vii.  701. 
•t  filium  vel  talem  propinquum  habuerit 


304  BENEFICES.  Notes  to 

might  also  be  for  the  sake  of  security.  And  this  is  precisely 
the  renewal  of  homage  and  fealty  on  a  change  of  tenancy, 
which  belonged  to  the  more  matured  stage  of  the  feudal 
polity. 

Mr.  Allen  observes,  with  respect  to  the  formula  of  Mar- 
culfus  quoted  in  my  note,  p.  161:  —  "Some  authors  have 
■considered  this  as  a  precedent  for  the  grant  of  an  hereditary 
benefice.  But  it  is  only  necessary  to  read  with  attention  the 
act  itself  to  perceive  that  what  it  creates  is  not  an  hereditary 
benefice,  but  an  alodial  estate.  It  is  viewed  in  this  light  in 
his  (Bignon's)  notes  on  a  subsequent  formula  (sect.  17),  con- 
firmatory of  what  had  been  done  under  the  preceding  one, 
and  it  is  only  from  inadvertence  that  it  could  have  been  <  on- 
sidered  in  a  different  point  of  view."  (Inquiry  into  Royal 
Prerogative,  Appendix,  p.  47.)  But  Bignon  took  for  grant- 
ed that  benefices  were  only  for  term  of  life,  and  consequently 
that  words  of  inheritance,  in  the  age  of  Marculfus,  implied 
an  alodial  grant.  The  question  is,  What  constituted  a  bene- 
fice ?  Was  it  not  a  grant  by  favor  of  the  king  or  other 
lord  ?  If  the  words  used  in  the  formula  of  Marculfus  are 
inconsistent  with  a  beneficiary  property,  we  must  give  up 
the  inference  from  the  treaty  of  Andely,  and  from  all  other 
phrases  which  have  seemed  to  convey  hereditary  benefices. 
It  is  true  that  the  formula  in  Marculfus  gives  a  larger  power 
of  alienation  than  belonged  afterwards  to  fiefs ;  but  did  it  put 
an  end  to  the  peculiar  obligation  of  the  holder  of  the  bene- 
fice towards  the  crown  ?  It  does  not  appear  to  me  unreason- 
able to  suppose  an  estate  so  conferred  to  have  been  strictly 
a  benefice,  according  to  the  notions  of  the  seventh  century. 

Subinfeudation  could  hardly  exist  to  any  considerable  de- 
gree until  benefices  became  hereditary.  But  as  soon  as  that 
change  took  place,  the  principle  was  very  natural  and  sure 
to  suggest  itself.  It  prodigiously  strengthened  the  aristoc- 
racy, of  which  they  could  not  but  be  aware  ;  and  they  had 
acquired  such  extensive  possessions  out  of  the  royal  domains, 
that  they  could  well  afford  to  take  a  rent  for  them  in  iron 
instead  of  silver.  Charlemagne,  as  Guizot  justly  conceives, 
strove  to  counteract  the  growing  feudal  spirit  by  drawing 
closer  the  bonds  between  the  sovereign  and  the  subject.  He 
demanded  an  oath  of  allegiance,  as  William  afterwards  did 
in  England,  from  the  vassals  of  mesne  lords.  But  alter  his 
death,  and  after  the  complete  establishment  of  an  hereditary 


Chap.  II.  SUBINFEUDATION.  80S 

right  in  the  grants  of  the  crown,  it  was  utterly  impossible  to 
prevent  the  general  usage  of  subinfeudation. 

Mably  distinguishes  the  lands  granted  by  Charles  Martel 
to  his  German  followers  from  the  benefices  of  the  early 
kings,  reserving  to  the  former  the  name  of  fiefs.  These  he 
conceives  to  have  been  granted  only  for  life,  and  to  have, 
involved,  for  the  first  time,  the  obligation  of  military  service. 
(Observations  sur  l'Hist.  de  France,  vol.  i.  p.  32.)  But  as 
they  were  not  styled  fiefs  so  early,  but  only  benefices,  this 
distinction  seems  likely  to  deceive  the  reader ;  and  the  oath 
of  fidelity  taken  by  the  Antrustion,  which,  though  personal, 
could  not  be  a  weaker  obligation  after  he  had  acquired  a 
benefice,  carries  a  very  strong  presumption  that  military  ser- 
vice, at  least  in  defensive  wars,  not  always  distinguishable 
from  wars  to  revenge  a  wrong,  as  most  are  presumed  to  be, 
was  demanded  by  the  usages  and  moral  sentiments  of  the 
society.  We  have  not  a  great  deal  of  testimony  as  to  the 
grants  of  Charles  Martel ;  but  in  the  capitularies  of  Charle- 
magne it  is  evident  that  all  holders  of  benefices  were  bound 
to  follow  the  sovereign  to  the  field. 

M.  Guerard  (Cartulaire  de  Chartres,  i.  23)  is  of  opinion 
that,  though  benefices  were  ultimately  fiefs,  in  the  first  stage 
of  the  monarchy  they  were  only  usufructs;  and  the  word 
will  not  be  clearly  found  in  the  restrained  sense  during  that 
period.  "  Cette  difference  entre  deux  institutions  nees  Tune 
de  l'autre,  quoique  assez  delicate,  etait  essentielle.  Elte  ne 
pourrait  6tre  meconnue  que  par  ceux  qui  considereraient 
seulement,  les  benefices  a  la  fin,  et  lcs  fiefs  au  commencement 
de  leur  existence ;  alors  en  effet  les  uns  et  les  autres  se  con- 
fondaient."  That  they  were  not  mere  usufructs,  even  at 
first,  appears  to  me  more  probable. 

Note  X.     Page  163. 

Somner  says  that  he  has  not  found  the  word  feudum  ante- 
rior to  the  year  1000  ;  and  Muratori,  a  still  greater  authority 
doubts  whether  it  was  used  so  early.  I  have,  however 
observed  the  words  feum  and  fevum,  which  are  manifestly 
corruptions  of  feudum,  in  several  charters  about  960.  (Vais- 
sette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii.  Appendix,  p.  107,  128,  et 
alibi.)  Some  of  these  fiefs  appear  not  to  have  been  heredi- 
tary.    But,  independently  of   positive    instances,   can    it   b« 

VOL    I.  —  H  20 


3U6  SUBINFEUDATION.  Notes  tc 

doubted  that  some  word  of  barbarous  original  must  have  an- 
swered, in  the  vernacular  languages,  to  the  Latin  beneficium? 
See  Du  Cange,  v.  Feudum.  Sir  F.  Palgrave  answers  this 
by  producing  the  word  lelin.  (English  Commonwealth,  ii. 
208.)  And  though  M.  Thierry  assert-  (Recits  des  Temps 
Me'rovingiens,  i.  245)  that  this  is  modern  German,  he  seems 
to  be  altogether  mistaken.  (Palgrave,  ibid.)  But  when 
Sir  F.  Palgrave  proceeds  to  say  —  "The  essential  and  fun- 
damental principle  of  a  territorial  fief  or  feud  is,  that  the 
land  is  held  by  a  limited  or  conditional  estate  —  the  property 
being  in  the  lord,  and  the  usufruct  in  the  tenant,"  we  musi 
think  this  not  a  very  exact  definition  of  feuds  in  their  ma- 
ture state,  however  it  might  apply  to  the  early  benefices  for 
life.  The  property,  by  feudal  law,  was,  I  conceive,  strictly 
in  the  tenant ;  what  else  do  we  mean  by  fee-simple  ?  Mili- 
tary service  in  most  cases,  and  always  fealty,  were  due  to 
the  lord,  and  an  abandonment  of  the  latter  might  cause  for- 
feiture of  the  land ;  but  the  tenant  was  not  less  the  owner, 
and  might  destroy  it  or  render  it  unprofitable  if  he  pleased. 

Feudum  Sir  F.  Palgrave  boldly  derives  from  emphyteu- 
sis ;  and,  in  fact,  by  processes  familiar  to  etymologists,  that 
is,  cutting  off  the  head  and  legs,  and  extracting  the  back- 
bone, it  may  thence  be  exhibited  in  the  old  form,  feu?n,  or 
fevum.  M.  Thierry,  however,  thinks  feh,  that  is,  fee  or  pay, 
and  odh,  property,  to  be  the  true  root.  (Lettres  sur  l'Hist. 
de  France,  Lettre  x.)  Guizot  inclines  to  the  same  deriva 
tion  ;  and  it  is,  in  fact,  given  by  Du  Cange  and  others.  The 
derivation  of  alod  from  all  and  odh  seems  to  be  analogous ; 
and  the  word  udaller,  for  the  freeholder  of  the  Shetland  and 
Orkney  Isles,  strongly  confirms  this  derivation,  being  only 
the  two  radical  elements  reversed,  as  I  remember  to  have 
seen  observed  in  Gilbert  Stuart's  View  of  Society.  A  char- 
ter of  Charles  the  Fat  is  suspected  on  account  of  the  word 
feudum,  which  is  at  least  of  very  rare  occurrence  till  late  in 
the  tenth  century.  The  great  objection  to  emphyteusis  is, 
that  a  fief  is  a  different  thing.  Sir  F.  Palgrave,  indeed, 
contends  that  an  "  emphyteusis  "  is  often  called  a  "  precaria," 
and  that  the  word  "  precaria "  was  a  synonym  of  "  benefi- 
cium," as  beneficium  was  of  "  feudum."  But  does  it  appear 
from  the  ancient  use  of  the  words  "  precaria "  and  "  benefi- 
I'ium  "  that  they  were  convertible,  as  the  former  is  said,  by 
Muratori   and   Lehuerou.  to  have  been  with  emphyteusis? 


c'hap.  n.  CHANGE  OF  TENURES.  307 

(Murat.  Antiq.  Ital.  Diss,  xxxvi.  Lehuerou,  Inst.  Caroling, 
p.  183.)  The  tenant  by  emphyteusis,  whom  we  find  in  the 
Codes  of  Theodosius  and  Justinian,  was  little  more  than  a 
colonics,  a  demi-serf  attached  to  the  soil,  though  incapable  of 
being  dispossessed.  Is  this  like  the  holder  of  a  benefice,  the 
progenitor  of  the  great  feudal  aristocracy  ?  How  can  we 
compare  emphyteusis  with  beneficium  without  remembering 
that  one  was  commonly  a  grant  for  a  fixed  return  in  valu<T, 
answering  to  the  "  terras  censuales  "  of  later  times,  and  the 
latter,  as  the  word  implies,  a  free  donation  with  no  condition 
but  gratitude  and  fidelity  ?  The  word  precaria  is  for  the 
most  part  applied  to  ecclesiastical  property  which,  by  some 
usurpation,  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  laymen.  These  af- 
terwards, by  way  of  compromise,  were  permitted  to  continue 
as  tenants  of  the  church  for  a  limited  term,  generally  of  life, 
on  payment  of  a  fixed  rate.  Marculfus,  however,  gives  a 
form  in  which  the  grantor  of  the  precaria  appears  to  be  a 
layman.  Military  service  was  not  contemplated  in  the  em- 
phyteusis or  the  precaria,  nor  were  either  of  them  perpetui- 
ties ;  at  least  this  was  not  their  common  condition.  Meyer 
derives  feudum  from  fides,  quoting  Aimoin :  "  Leudibussuis 
mfide  disposuit."     (Inst,  Judic.  i.  187.) 

Note  XL     Pages  165,  167 

^  M.  Guizot,  with  the  highest  probability,  refers  the  conver- 
sion of  alodial  into  feudal  lands  to  the  principle  of  commenda- 
tion. (Essais  sur  l'Hist.  de  France,  p.  166.)  Though  orig- 
inally this  had  no  relation  to  land,  but  created  a  merely  per- 
sonal ^  tie  —  fidelity  in  return  for  protection  —  it  is  easy  to 
conceive  that  the  alodialist  who  obtained  this  privilege,  as  it 
might  justly  appear  in  an  age  of  rapine,  must  often  do  so  by 
subjecting  himself  to  the  law  of  tenure  —  a  law  less  burden- 
some at  a  time  when  warfare,  if  not  always  defensive,  as  it 
was  against  the  Normans,  was  always  carried  on  in  the 
neighborhood,  at  little  expense  beyond  the  ravages  that 
might  attend  its  want  of  success.  Bayiiouard  has  published 
a  curious  passage  from  the  Life  of  St.  Gerald,  a  count  of  Au- 
rillac,  where  he  is  said  to  have  refused  to  subject  his  alodial 
lands  to  the  duke  of  Guienne,  with  the  exception  of  one 
farm,  peculiarly  situated.  "  Erat  enim  semotim,  inter  pessi- 
naos  vicinos,  longe  a  caeteris  disparatum."     His  other  land? 


808  PERSONAL  COMMENDATION.  Xoies  to 

were  so  situated  thai  he  was  able  to  defend  them.  Nothing 
can  better  explain  the  principle  which  riveted  the  feudal 
yoke  upon  alodialists.  (Ili>t.  du  Droit  Municipal,  ii.  261.) 
In  my  text,  though  M.  Guizot  has  done  me  the  honor  to 
say,  "  M.  Montlosier  et  M.  Hallam  en  ont  mieux  demele  la 
nature  et  les  causes,"  the  subject  is  not  sufficiently  disen- 
tangled, and  the  territorial  character  which  commendation 
ultimately  assumed  is  too  much  separated  from  the  personal 
The  latter  preceded  even  the  conquest  of  Gaul,  both  among 
the  barbarian  invaders  themselves  and  the  provincial  sub- 
jects,1 and  was  a  sort  of  clientela  ;2  but  the  former  deserves 
also  the  name  of  commendation,  though  the  Franks  had  a 
word  of  their  own  to  express  it.  We  find  in  Marculfus  the 
form  by  which  the  king  took  an  ecclesiastical  person,  with 
his  property  and  followers,  under  his  own  mundeburde,  or 
safeguard.  (Lib.  i.  c.  44.)  This  was  equivalent  to  com- 
mendation, or  rather  another  word  for  it ;  except  as  one 
rather  expresses  the  act  of  the  tenant,  the  other  that  of  the 
lord.  Letters  of  safeguard  were  not  by  any  means  confined 
to  the  church.  They  were  frequent  as  long  as  the  crown 
had  any  power  to  protect,  and  revived  again  in  the  decline  of 
the  feudal  system.  Nor  were  they  limited  to  the  crown  ;  we 
have  the  form  by  which  the  poor  might  place  themselves  un- 
der the  mundeburde  of  the  rich,  still  being  free,  "  ingenuili 
ordine  servientes."  Formulas  Veteres  Bignonii,  c.  44 ;  vide 
Naudet,  ubi  supra.  The}-  were  then  even  sometimes  called, 
as  the  latter  supposes,  lidi  or  liti,  so  that  a  freeman,  even  of 

1  M.  Lehuerou  has  gone  very  deeply  plication  of  the  origin  of  feudal  polity, 
inls)  the  mundium,  or  personal  safeguard,  which  was  in  no   degree  of  a  domestic 
by  which  the  inferior  class  among  the  character.     The  utmost  they  can  allow 
Germans  were  commended  to  a  lord,  and  is,  that   territorial  jurisdiction  was  ex- 
pl&ced  under   his  protection,  in  return  tended  to  feudal  vassals,  by  analogy  to 
for  their  own  fidelity  and  service.    (Insti-  that  which  the  patron,  or  chief  of  the 
tutions  Carolingiennes,  liv.  i.  ch.  i.  §  2.)  mundium,  had  exercised  over  those  who 
It  is  a  subject,  as  he  conceives,  of  the  recognized  him  as  protector,  as  well  as 
highest  importance  in   these  inquiries,  over  his  family  and  servants.     There  is 
being,    in   fact,    the   real   origin    of   the  nevertheless,  perhaps,  a  larger  basis  of 
feudal  polity   afterwards   established  in  truth  in  M.  Lehuerou's  system  than  they 
Europe;  though,  from  the  circumstances  admit,  though  I  do  not  conceive  it  to 
of  ancient  Germany,  it  was  of  necessity  explain  the  whole  feudal  system, 
a  personal  and  not  a  territorial  vassalage.  2  Garnier  has  happily  adduced  a  very 
It  fell  in  very  naturally  with  the  similar  ancient  authority   for    this   use    of  th« 
principle  of  commendation   existing  in  word, 
the  Roman  empire.     This  bold  and  orig- 
inal theory,  however,  has  not  been  ad-  Thais  patri  se  commendavit ;  in  client*, 
uiitted  by  his  contemporary  antiquaries.  lam  et  fidem 
M.    Giraud   and  M.  Mignet  (Seances  et  Nobis  dedit  se.  —  Ter.  Eun.,  Act  5 
Travaux  de  l'Academie  des  Sciences  Mo- 
rales et  Politiques,  pour  Novembre,  1843),  Origine  du  Gouvernement  Francais  (in 
•specially  the  latter,  dissent  from  this  ex-  Leber  ii.  194). 


Uha^>.  II.  PERSONAL  COMMENDATION.  309 

the  higl  er  class  might,  at  his  option,  fall,  for  the  sake  of 
protection,  into  an  inferior  position. 

I  have  no  hesitation  in  agreeing  with  Guizot  that  the 
conversion  of  alodial  into  feudal  property  was  nothing  more 
than  an  extension  of  the  old  commendation.  It  was  not 
necessary  that  there  should  be  an  express  surrender  and 
regrant  of  the  land ;  the  acknowledgment  of  seigniory  by 
the  commendatus  would  supply  the  place.  M.  Naudet 
(Nouv.  Mem.  de  l'Acad.  des  Inscrip.  vol.  viii.)  accumulates 
proofs  of  commendation ;  it  is  surprising  that  so  little  was 
said  of  it  by  the  earlier  antiquaries.  One  of  his  instances 
deserves  to  be  mentioned.  "  Isti  homines,"  says  a  writer  of 
Charlemagne's  age,  "fuerunt  liberi  et  ingenui;  sed  quod 
militiam  regis  non  valebant  exercere,  tradiderunt  alodos 
suos  sancto  Germano."1  (P.  567.)  We  may  perhaps  infer 
from  this  that  the  tenants  of  the  church  were  not  bound  to 
military  service.  "  No  general  law,"  says  M.  Guizot  (Col- 
lect, de  Mem.  i.  419),  "exempted  them  from  it;  but  the 
clergy  endeavored  constantly  to  secure  such  an  immunity, 
either  by  grant  or  by  custom,  which  was  one  cause  that  their 
tenants  were  better  off  than  those  of  laymen."  The  .differ- 
ence was  indeed  most  important,  and  must  have  prodigiously 
enhanced  the  wealth  of  the  church.  But  after  the  feudal 
polity  became  established  we  do  not  find  that  there  was  any 
dispensation  for  ecclesiastical  fiefs.  The  advantage  of  their 
tenants  lay  in  the  comparatively  pacific  character  of  their 
spiritual  lords.  It  may  be  added  that,  from  many  passages 
in  the  laws  of  the  Saxons,  Alemanns,  and  Bavarians,  all  the 
"  commendati "  appear  to  have  been  denominated  vassals, 
whether  they  possessed  benefices  or  not.  That  word  after- 
wards implied  a  more  strictly  territorial  limitation. 

Thus  then  let  the  reader  keep  in  mind  that  the  feudal 
system,  as  it  is  commonly  called,  was  the  general  establish- 
ment of  a  peculiar  relation  between  the  sovereign  (not  as 
king,  but  as  lord)  and  his  immediate  vassals ;  between  these 
again  and  others  standing  to  them  in  the  same  relation  of 
vassalage,  and  thus  frequently  through  several  links  in  the 
chain  of  tenancy.  If  this  relation,  and  especially  if  the  lat- 
ter and  essential  element,  subinfeudation,  is  not  to  be  found, 
there  is  no  feudal  system,  though  there  may  be  analogies  to 

i  It  will  be  remarked  that  liberi  and  ingenui  appear  he^s  to  be  distinguished.*  "  no* 
only  free,  but  gentlemen  " 


310  PERSONAL  COMMENDATION.  Notes   wi 

it,  more  or  less  remarkable  or  strict.  But  if  he  asks  what 
were  the  immediate  causes  of  establishing  this  polity,  we 
must  refer  him  to  three  alone  —  to  the  grants,  of  beneficiary 
lands  to  the  vassal  and  his  heirs,  without  which  there  could 
hardly  be  subinfeudation ;  to  the  analogous  grants  of  official 
honors,  particularly  that  of  count  or  governor  of  a  district ; 
and,  lastly,  to  the  voluntary  conversion  of  alodial  into  feudal 
tenure,  through  free  landholders  submitting  their  persons  and 
estates,  by  way  of  commendation,  to  a  neighboring  lord  or 
to  the  count  of  a  district.  All  these,  though  several  instan- 
ces, especially  of  the  first,  occurred  much  earlier,  belong 
generally  to  the  ninth  century,  and  may  be  supposed  to  have 
been  fully  accomplished  about  the  beginning  of  the  tenth  — 
to  which  period,  therefore,  and  not  to  an  earlier  one,  we  refer 
the  feudal  system  in  France.  We  say  in  France,  because 
our  attention  has  been  chiefly  directed  to  that  kingdom ;  in 
none  was  it  of  earlier  origin,  but  in  some  it  cannot  be  traced 
so  high. 

An  hereditary  benefice  was  strictly  a  fief,  at  least  if  we 
presume  it  to  have  implied  military  service  ;  hereditary  gov- 
ernments were  not :  something  more,  therefore,  was  required 
to  assimilate  these,  which  were  far  larger  and  more  impor- 
tant than  donations  of  land.  And,  perhaps,  it  was  only  by 
degrees  that  the  great  chiefs,  especially  in  the  south,  who, 
in  the  decay  of  the  Caroline  race,  established  their  patri- 
monial rule  over  extensive  regions,  condescended  to  swear 
fealty,  and  put  on  the  condition  of  vassals  dependent  on  the 
crown.  Such,  at  least,  is  the  opinion  of  some  modern 
French  writers,  who  seem  to  deny  all  subjection  during  the 
evening  of  the  second  and  dawn  of  the  third  race.  But  if 
they  did  not  repair  to  Paris  or  Laon  in  order  to  swear  fealty, 
they  kept  the  name  of  the  reigning  king  in  their  charters,. 

The  hereditary  benefices  of  the  ninth  century,  or,  in  other 
words,  fiefs,  preserved  the  nominal  tie,  and  kept  France 
from  utter  dissolution.  They  deserve  also  the  greater  praise 
of  having  been  the  means  of  regenerating  the  national  char- 
acter, and  giving  its  warlike  bearing  to  the  French  people ; 
not,  indeed,  as  yet  collectively,  but  in  its  separate  centres  of 
force,  after  the  pusillanimous  reign  of  Charles  the  Bald. 
They  produced  mu  h  evil  and  misery ;  but  it  is  reasonable 
to  believe  that  ihey  prevented  more.  France  was  too  ex- 
tensive a  kingdom  to  be  governed  by  a  central  administra 


Chap.  n.  FRENCH  NOBILITY.  311 

tion,  unless  Charlemagne  had  possessed  the  gift  of  propagat- 
ing a  race  of  Alfreds  and  Edwards,  instead  of  Louis  the 
Stammerers  and  Charles  the  Balds.  Her  temporary  dis- 
integration by  the  feudal  system  was  a  necessary  conse- 
quence ;  without  that  system  there  would  have  been  a  final 
dissolution  of  the  monarchy,  and  perhaps  its  conquest  by 
barbarians. 

Note  XII.     Page  192. 

M.  Thierry,  whose  writings  display  so  much  antipathy  to 
the  old  nobility  of  his  country  that  they  ought  not  to  be 
fully  trusted  on  such  a  subject,  observes  that  the  Franks 
were  more  haughty  towards  their  subjects  than  any  other 
barbarians,  as  is  shown  in  the  difference  of  weregild.  From 
them  this  spirit  passed  to  the  French  nobles  of  the  middle 
ages,  though  they  were  not  all  of  Frank  descent.  "  L'exces 
d'orgueil  attache  a  longtemps  au  nom  de  gentilhomme  est  ne 
en  France  ;  son  foyer,  comme  celui  de  l'organization  feodale, 
fut  la  Gaule  du  Centre  et  du  Nord,  et  peut-etre  aussi  l'ltalie 
Lombarde.  C'est  de  la  qu'il  s'est  propage  dans  les  pays 
Germaniques,  ou  la  noblesse  anterieurement  se  distinguait 
peu  de  la  simple  condition  d'homme  libre.  Ce  mouvement 
crea,  par-tout  ou  il  s'etendit,  deux  populations,  et  comme 
deux  nations,  proprement  distinctes."  (Recits  des  Temps 
Merovingiens,  i.  250.) 

The  feudal  principle  was  essentially  aristocratic,  and  tend- 
ed to  enhance  every  unsocial  and  unchristian  sentiment 
involved  in  the  exclusive  respect  for  birth.  It  had,  of 
course,  its  countervailing  virtues,  which  writers  of  M.  Thier- 
ry's school  do  not  enough  remember.  But  a  rural  aris- 
tocracy in  the  meridian  of  feudal  usages  was  insulated  in 
the  midst  of  the  other  classes  of  society  far  more  than  could 
ever  happen  in  cities,  or  in  any  period  of  an  advanced 
civilization.  "  Never,"  says  Guizot,  "  had  the  primary  social 
molecule  been  so  separated  from  other  similar  molecules; 
never  had  the  distance  been  so  great  between  the  simple 
and  essential  elements  of  society."  The  chatelain,  amidst 
his  machicolated  battlements  and  massive  gates  with  their 
iron  portcullis,  received  the  vavassor,  though  as  an  interior, 
at  his  board ;  but  to  the  roturier  no  feudal  board  was  open  : 
the   owner   of  a  'k  terre    censive,"  ibe   opulent   burgess  of  a 


312  FRENCH  NOBILITY.  Notes  to 

neighboring  town,  was  as  little  admitted  to  the  banquet  of 
the  lord  as  he  was  allowed  to  unite  himself  in  marriage  to 
his  family. 

"  Nee  Deus  hunc  mensa,  Dea  nee  digtiata  cubili  ess." 

Pilgrims,  indeed,  and  travelling  merchants,  may,  if  we 
trust  romance,  have  been  always  excepted.  Although, 
therefore,  some  of  Guizot's  phrases  seem  overcharged,  since 
there  was,  in  fact,  more  necessary  intercourse  between  the 
different  classes  than  they  intimate,  yet  that  of  a  voluntary 
nature,  and  what  we  peculiarly  call  social,  was  very  limited. 
Nor  is  this  surprising  when  Ave  recollect  that  it  has  been  so 
till  comparatively  a  recent  period. 

Guizot  has  copied  a  picturesque  description  of  a  feudal 
castle  in  the  fourteenth  century  from  Monteil's  "  Histoir  des 
Francais  des  divers  Etats  aux  cinq  derniers  Siecles."  It  is 
one  of  the  happiest  passages  in  that  writer,  hardly  more 
distinguished  by  his  vast  reading  than  by  his  skill  in  com- 
bining and  applying  it,  though  sometimes  bordering  on 
tediousness  by  the  profuse  expenditure  of  his  commonplace- 
books  on  the  reader. 

"  Representez  vous  d'abord  •  une  position  superbe,  une 
montagne  escarpee,  herissee  de  rochers,  sillonee  de  ravins 
et  de  precipices ;  sur  le  penchant  est  le  chateau.  Les  petites 
maisons  qui  l'entourent  enfont  ressortir  la  grandeur  ;  l'lndre 
semble  s'ecarter  avec  respect ;  elle  fait  un  large  demi-cercle 
a  ses  pieds. 

"  II  faut  voir  ce  chateau  lorsqu'au  soleil  levant  ses  galeries 
exterieures  reluisent  des  armures  de  ceux  qui  font  le  guet, 
et  que  ses  tours  se  montrent  toutes  brillantes  de  leurs  grandes 
grilles  neuves.  II  faut  voir  tous  ces  hauts  batiments  qui 
remplissent  de  courage  ceux  qui  les  defendent,  et  de  frayeur 
ceux  qui  seraient  tentes  de  les  attaquer. 

"  La  porte  se  presente  toute  couverte  de  tetes  de  sang- 
liers  ou  de  loups,  flanquee  de  tourelles  et  couronnee  d'  in 
haut  corps  de  garde.  Entrez-vous?  trois  encientes,  trois 
fosses,  trois  pont-levis  a  passer ;  vous  vous  trouverez  dans 
la  grande  cour  carree  ou  sont  les  eiternes,  et  a  droite  ou  a 
gauche  les  ecuries,  les  poulaillers,  les  colombiers,  les  remises. 
Les  caves,  les  souterrains,  les  prisons  sont  par  dessous ;  par 
dessus  sont  les  logements,  les  magasins,  les  lardoirs  ou  saloirs, 
les  arsenaux.     Tous  les  combles  sont  bordes  des  machicoulis* 


Chap.  II.  FREEMEN.  313 

des  parapets,  des  cliemins  le  ronde,  des  guerites.  Au  milieu 
de  la  tour  est  le  donjon,  qui  renferme  les  archives  et  le  tresor. 
II  est  profondeinent  fossoye  dans  tout  son  pourtour,  et  on  n'y 
entre  que  par  un  pont  presque  toujours  leve ;  bien  que  les 
murailles  aient,  comme  celles  du  chateau,  plus  de  six  pieds 
d'epaisseur,  il  est  revetu  jusqu'a  la  moitie  de  sa  hauteur, 
d'une  chemise,  ou  second  mur,  en  grosses  pierres  de  taille. 

"  Ce  chateau  vient  d'etre  refait  a  neuf.  II  y  a  quelque 
chose  de  leger,  de  frais,  que  n'avaient  pas  les  chateaux 
lourds  et  massifs  des  siecles  passes."  (Civilis.  en  France, 
Lecon  35.) 

And  this  was  true ;  for  the  castles  of  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries  wanted  all  that  the  progress  of  luxury 
and  the  cessation,  or  nearly  such,  of  private  warfare  had  in- 
troduced before  the  age  to  which  this  description  refers ; 
they  were  strongholds,  and  nothing  more ;  dark,  small,  com- 
fortless, where  one  thought  alone  could  tend  to  dispel  their 
gloom,  that  life  and  honor,  and  what  was  most  valuable  in 
goods,  were  more  secure  in  them  than  in  the  champaign 
around. 

Note  XIII.     Page  196. 

M.  Guizot  has  declared  it  to  be  the  most  difficult  of  ques 
tions  relating  to  the  state  of  persons  in  the  period  from  the 
fifth  to  the  tenth  century,  whether  there  existed  in  the  coun- 
tries subdued  by  the  Germans,  and  especially  by  the  Franks, 
a  numerous  and  important  class  of  freemen,  not  vassals 
either  of  the  king  or  any  other  proprietor,  nor  any  way  de- 
pendent upon  them,  and  with  no  obligation  except  towards 
the  state,  its  laws  and  magistrates.  (Essais  sur  l'Hist.  de 
France,  p.  232.)  And  this  question,  contrary  to  almost  all 
his  predecessors,  he  inclines  to  decide  negatively.  It  is, 
indeed,  evident,  and  is  confessed  by  M.  Guizot,  that  in  the 
ages  nearest  to  the  conquest  such  a  class  not  only  existed, 
but  even  comprised  a  large  part  of  the  nation.  Such  were 
the  owners  of  sqrtes  or  of  terra  Salica,  the  alodialists  of  the 
early  period.  It  is  also  agreed,  as  has  been  shown  in 
another  place,  that,  towards  the  tenth  century,  the  number 
of  these  independent  landholders  was  exceedingly  dimin- 
ished by  territorial  commendation ;  that  is,  the  subjection  of 
their  lands  to  a  feudal  tenure.     The  last  of  these  changes 


814  FREEMEN.  Notbb  to 

however,  cannot  have  become  general  under  Charlemagne, 
on  account  of  the  numerous  capi*ularies  which  distinguish 
those  who  held  lands  of  their  own,  or  alodia,  from  beneficiary 
tenants.  The  former,  therefore,  must  still  have  been  a 
large  and  important  class.  What  proportion  they  bore  to 
i  he  whole  nation  at  that  or  any  other  era  it  seems  impossi- 
ble to  pronounce ;  and  equally  so  to  what  extent  the  whole 
usage  of  personal  commendation,  contradistinguished  from 
territorial,  may  have  reached.  Still  alodial  lands,  as  has 
been  observed,  were  always  very  common  in  the  south  of 
France,  to  which  Flanders  might  be  added.  The  strength 
of  the  feudal  tenures,  as  Thierry  remarks,  was  between  the 
Somme  and  the  Loire.  (Recits  des  T.  M.  i.  245.)  These 
alodial  proprietors  were  evidently  freemen.  In  the  law  of 
France  alodial  lands  were  always  noble,  like  fiefs,  till  the 
reformation  of  the  Coutume  de  Paris  in  1580,  when  "  aleux 
roturiers "  were  for  the  first  time  recognized.  I  owe  this 
fact,  which  appeal's  to  throw  some  light  on  the  subject  of 
this  note,  to  Laferriere,  Hist,  du  Droit  Francais,  p.  129. 
But,  perhaps,  this  was  not  the  case  in  Flanders,  which  was 
an  alodial  country :  — "  La  maxime  franyaise,  nulle  terre 
sans  seigneur,  n'avait  point  lieu  dans  les  Pays-Bas.  On  s'en 
tenait  au  principe  de  la  liberte  naturelle  des  biens,  et  par 
suite  a  la  necessite  d'en  prouver  la  sujetion  ou  la  servitude ; 
aussi  les  biens  allodiaux  etaient  tres  nombreux,  et  rappe- 
laient  toujours  l'esprit  de  liberte  que  les  Beiges  ont  aime  et 
conserve  taut  a  l'egard  de  leurs  biens  que  de  leurs  person- 
nes."  (Mem.  de  l'Acad.  de  Bruxelles,  vol.  iii.  p.  16.)  It 
bears  on  this,  that  in  all  the  customary  law  of  the  Nether- 
lands no  preference  was  given  to  sex  or  primogeniture  in 
succession  (p.  21). 

But  there  were  many  other  freemen  in  France,  even  in 
the  tenth  century,  if  we  do  not  insist  on  the  absolute  and 
insulated  independence  which  Guizot  requires.  "If  we 
must  understand,"  says  M.  Guerard  (Cartulaire  de  Chartres, 
p.  34),  "  by  freemen  those  who  enjoyed  a  liberty  without  re- 
striction, that  is,  who,  owing  no  duties  or  service  to  any  one, 
could  go  and  settle  wherever  they  pleased  they  would  not 
be  found  very  numerous  in  our  chartulary  during  the  pure 
feudal  regimen.  But  if,  as  we  should,  we  courprehend  under 
this  name  whoever  is  neither  a  noble  nor  a  serf,  the  number 
of  people   in  this  intermediate  condition   was   very   consid- 


Uhap.  II.  COLONI.  315 

erable."  And  of  these  he  specifies  several  varieties.  This 
was  in  the  eleventh  century,  and  partly  later,  when  the  con- 
version of  alodial  property  had  been  completed. 

Savigny  was  the  first  who  proved  the  Arimanni  of  Loni- 
bardy  to  have  been  freemen,  corresponding  to  the  Rachim 
burgii  of  the  Franks,  and  distinguished  both  from  bondmen 
and  from  those  to  whom  they  owed  obedience.  Citizens  are 
sometimes  called  Arimanni.  The  word  occurs,  though  very 
rarely,  out  of  Italy.  (Vol.  i.  p.  176,  English  translation.) 
Guizot  includes  among  the  Ariinanni  the  leudes  or  benefi- 
ciary vassals.  See,  too,  Troja,  v.  146,  148.  There  seems, 
indeed,  no  reason  to  doubt  that  vassals,  and  other  commen- 
dati,  would  be  counted  as  Arimanni.  Neither  feudal  tenure 
nor  personal  commendation  could  possibly  derogate  from  a 
free  and  honorable  status. 

Note  XIV.     Page  197. 

These  names,  though  in  a  general  sense  occupying  simi- 
lar positions  in  the  social  scale,  denote  different  persons. 
The  coloni  were  Romans,  in  the  sense  of  the  word  then 
usual ;  that  is,  they  were  the  cultivators  of  land  under  the 
empire,  of  whom  we  find  abundant  notice  both  in  the  Theo- 
dosian  Code  and  that  of  Justinian.1  An  early  instance  of 
this  use  of  the  word  occurs  in  the  Historian  Augustas  Scrip- 
tores.  Trebellius  Pollio  says,  after  the  great  victory  of 
Claudius  over  the  Goths,  where  an  immense  number  of  pris- 
oners was  taken  — "  Factus  miles  barbarus  ac  colonus  ex 
Gotho  ; "  an  expression  not  clear,  and  which  perplexed  Salma- 
sius.  But  it  may  perhaps  be  rendered,  the  barbarians  partly 
entered  the  legions,  partly  cultivated  the  ground,  in  the  rank 
of  coloni.  It  is  thus  understood  by  Troja  (ii.  705).  He  con- 
ceives that  a  large  proportion  of  the  coloni,  mentioned  under 
the  Christian  emperors,  were  barbarian  settlers  (iii.  1074). 
They  came  in  the  place  of  praedial  slaves,  who,  though  not 
wholly  unknown,  grew  less  common  after  the  establishment  of 
Christianity.  The  Roman  colonus  was  free  ;  he  could  marry 
a  free  woman,  and  have  legitimate  children ;  he  could  serve 
in  the  army,  and  was  capable  of  property ;  his  peculium, 
unlike  that  of  the  absolute  slave,  could  not  be  touched  by 

i  See  Cod.  TUeod.  1 .  v  tit.  9,  with  the  copious  Paraiitlon  of  Gothofred.  —  Cod.  Just 
d   tit   47  et  alibi 


316  TRIBUTAKII,  LIDI  Notks  to 

his  master.  Nor  could  Lis  fixed  rent  or  duty  be  enhanced, 
lie  could  even  sue  his  master  for  any  crime  committed  with 
respect  to  him,  or  for  undue  exaction.  He  was  attached,  on 
the  other  hand,  to  the  soil,  and  might  in  certain  cases  re- 
ceive corporal  punishment.  (Troja,  iii.  1072.)  He  paid  a 
capitation  tax  or  census  to  the  state,  the  frequent  enhance- 
ment of  which  contributed  to  that  decline  of  the  agricultural 
population  which  preceded  the  barbarian  conquest.  Guizot, 
in  whose  thirty-seventh  lecture  on  the  Civilization  of  France 
the  subject  is  well  treated,  derives  the  origin  of  this  Mate  of 
society  from  that  of  Gaul  before  the  Roman  conquest.  But 
since  we  find  it  in  the  whole  empire,  as  is  shown  by  many 
laws  in  the  Code  of  Justinian,  we  may  look  on  it  perhaps 
rather  as  a  modification  of  ancient  slavery,  unless  we  sup- 
pose all  the  coloni,  in  this  latter  sense  of  the  word,1  to  have 
been  originally  barbarians,  who  had  received  lands  on  con- 
dition of  remaining  on  them.  But  thi;-,  however  frequent, 
seems  a  basis  not  quite  wide  enough  for  so  extensive  a  ten- 
ure. Nor  need  we  believe  that  the  coloni  were  always 
raised  from  slavery ;  they  might  have  descended  into  their 
own  order,  as  well  as  risen  to  it.  It  appears  by  a  passage  in 
Salvian,  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  that  many 
freemen  had  been  compelled  to  fall  into  this  condition  ;  which 
confirms,  by  analogy,  the  supposition  above  mentioned  of  M. 
Naudet,  as  to  a  similar  degradation  of  a  part  of  the  Franks 
themselves  after  the  conquest.  It  was  an  inferior  species  of 
commendation  or  vassalage,  or,  more  strictly,  an  analogous 
result  of  the  state  of  society. 

The  forms  of  Marculfus,  and  all  the  documents  of  the 
following  ages,  furnish  abundant  proofs  of  the  continuance  of 
the  coloni  in  this  middle  state  between  entire  freedom  and 
servitude.  And  these  were  doubtless  reckoned  among  the 
"  tributarii "  of  the  Salic  law,  whose  composition  was  fixed 
at  forty-five  solidi ;  for  a  slave  had  no  composition  due  to  his 
kindred  ;  he  was  his  master's  chattel,  and  to  be  paid  for  as 
such.  But  the  tributary  was  not  necessarily  a  colonus.  All 
who  possessed  no  lands  were  subjected  by  the  imj  erial  fisc  to 
a  personal  capitation.  And  it  has  appeared  to  us  that  the 
Romans  in  Gaul  continued  regularly  to  pay  this  under  the 
house  of  Clovis.     To  these  Roman  tributaries  the  barbarian 

1  The  oolonus  of  Cato  and  other  classical  authors  was  a  free  tenant  or  farmer,  ai 
has  been  already  mentioned. 


Chap.  EL  VILLEINAGE.  317 

lidi  seem  nearly  to  have  corresponded.  This  was  a  class,  as 
has  been  already  said,  not  quite  freeborn  ;  so  that  "  Francus 
ingenuus "  was  no  tautology,  as  some  have  fancied,  yet  far 
from  slaves  ;  without  political  privileges  or  rights  of  adminis- 
tering justice  in  the  county  court,  like  the  Rachimburgii,  and 
so  little  favored,  that,  while  the  Frank  accused  of  a  theft,  that 
is,  I  presume,  taken  in  the  fact,  was  to  be  brought  before  his 
peers,  the  lidus,  under  the  name  of  "  debilior  persona,"  which 
probably  included  the  Roman  tributary,  was  to  be  hanged  on 
the  spot.  Throughout  the  Salic  and  Ripuarian  codes  the 
ingenuus  is  opposed  both  to  the  lidus  and  to  the  servus  ;  so 
that  the  threefold  division  is  incontestable.  It  corresponds  in 
a  certain  degree  to  the  eddingu  frilingi,  and  lazzi,  or  the 
eorl,  ceorl,  and  thrall  of  the  northern  nations  (Grimm,  Deut- 
sche Rechts  Alterthiimer,  p.  306  et  alibi)  ;  though  we  do  not 
find  a  strict  proportion  in  the  social  state  of  the  second  ordei 
in  every  country.  The  ucoloni  partiarii,"  frequently  men- 
tioned in  the  Theodosian  Code,  were  metayers  ;  and  M 
Guerard  says  that  lands  were  chiefly  held  by  such  in  the  age 
of  Charlemagne  and  his  family.  (Cart,  de  Chartres,  i.  109.) 
The  demesne  lands  of  the  manor,  however,  were  never  occu- 
pied by  coloni,  but  by  serfs  or  domestic  slaves. 

Note  XV.     Page  198. 

The  poor  early  felt  the  necessity  of  selling  themselves  foi 
subsistence  in  times  of  famine.  "  Subdiderunt  se  pauperes 
servitio,"  says  Gregory  of  Tours,  a.d.  oS5,  «  ut  quantuhnn- 
-unque  de  alimento  porrigerent."  (Lib.  vii.  c.  45.)  This 
mug  continued  to  be  the  practice ;  and  probably  the  remark 
able  number  of  famines  which  are  recorded,  especially  in  the 
ninth  and  eleventh  centuries,  swelled  the  sad  list  of  those 
unhappy  poor  who  were  reduced  to  barter  liberty  for  bread. 
Mr.  Wright,  in  the  thirtieth  volume  of  the  Archajologia  (p. 
223),  has  extracted  an  entry  from  an  Anglo-Saxon  manu- 
script, where  a  lady,  about  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  manu- 
mits  some  slaves,  "whose  heads,"  as  it  is  simply  and  forcibly 
expressed,  "  she  had  taken  for  their  meat  in  the  evil  day-." 
Evil  indeed  were  those  days  in  France,  when  out  of  seventy 
three  years,  the  reigns  of  Hugh  Capet  and  his  two  successors, 
forty-eklit  were  years  of  famine.  Evil  were  the  days  for  five 
vears  from   1015,  in  the  whole  western  world,  when  not  a 


318  VILLEINAGE.  Notes  to 

country  could  be  named  that  was  not  destitute  of  bread. 
These  were  famines,  as  Radulfus  Glaber  and  other  contem- 
porary writers  tell  us,  in  which  mothers  ate  their  children, 
and  children  their  parents  ;  and  human  flesh  was  sold,  with 
some  pretence  of  concealment,  in  the  markets.  It  is  probable 
that  England  differed  less  than  France  ;  but  so  long  and  fre- 
quent a  scarcity  of  necessary  food  must  have  affected,  in  the 
latter  country,  the  whole  organic  frame  of  society. 

It  has  been  a  very  general  opinion  that  during  the  lawless- 
ness of  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries,  the  aristocratic  element 
of  society  continually  gaining  ground,  the  cultivators  fell  into 
a  much  worse  condition,  and  either  from  freemen  became 
villeins,  or,  if  originally  in  the  order  of  tributaries,  became 
iess  and  less  capable  of  enjoying  such  personal  rights  as  that 
otate  implied ;  that  they  fell,  in  short,  almost  into  >ervitude. 
"  Dans  le  commencement  de  la  troisieme  race,"  says  Montes- 
quieu, "  presque  tout  le  bas  peuple  etait  serf."  (Lib.  xxviii. 
c.  45.)  Sismondi,  who  never  draws  a  favorable  picture,  not 
only  descants  repeatedly  on  this  oppression  of  the  common- 
alty, but  traces  it  by  the  capitularies.  "  Les  loix  seules  nous 
donnent  quelque  indication  d'une  revolution  importante  a 
laquelle  la  grande  masse  du  peuple  fut  exposee  a  plusieurs 
reprises  dans  toute  l'etendue  des  Gaules,  —  revolution  qui, 
s'etant  operee  sans  violence,  n'a  laisse  aucune  trace  dans 
l'histoire,  et  qui  doit  cependant  expliquer  seule  les  alterna- 
tives de  force  et  de  faiblesse  dans  les  etats  du  moyen  age. 
C'est  le  passage  des  cultivateurs  de  la  condition  libre  a  la 
condition  servile.  L'esclavage  etant  une  fois  introduite  et 
protegee  par  les  loix,  la  consequence  de  la  prosperite,  de 
l'accroissement  des  richesses  devair  etre  toujours  la  disparition 
de  toutes  les  petites  proprietes,  la  multiplication  des  esclaves, 
et  la  cessation  absolue  de  tout  travail  qui  ne  serait  pas  fait 
par  des  mains  serviles."  (Hist,  des  Francais,  vol.  ii.  p.  273.) 
Nor  should  we  have  believed,  from  the  general  language  of 
historical  antiquaries,  that  any  change  for  the  better  took 
place  till  a  much  later  era.  We  know  indeed  from  history 
that,  about  the  year  1000,  the  Norman  peasantry,  excited  by 
oppression,  broke  out  into  a  general  and  well-organized  re- 
volt, quelled  by  the  severest  punishments.  This  is  told  a; 
some  length  by  Wace,  in  the  "  Roman  de  Ron."  And  every 
inference  from  the  want  of  all  law  except  what  the  lords 
exercised  themselves,  from  the  strength  of  their  castles,  from 


Chap.  II.  VILLEINAGE.  319 

the  fierceness  of  their  characters,  from  the  apparent  inability 
of  the  peasants  to  make  any  resistance  which  should  not  end 
in  greater  sufferings,  converges  to  the  same  result. 

It  is  not  therefore  without  some  surprise  that,  in  a  recent 
publication,  we  meet  with  a  totally  opposite  hypothesis  on  this 
important  portion  of  social  history.  The  editor  of  the  Cartu- 
laire  de  Chartres  maintains  that  the  peasantry,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  eleventh  century,  enjoyed  rights  of  property  and 
succession  which  had  been  denied  to  their  ancestors  ;  that  the 
movement  from  the  ninth  century  had  been  upwards ;  so 
that,  during  that  period  of  anarchy  which  we  presume  to 
have  been  exceedingly  unfavorable  to  their  privileges,  they 
had  in  reality,  by  force,  usage,  or  concession,  gained  possession 
of  them.  They  could  not  indeed  leave  their  lands,  but  they 
occupied  them  subject  to  known  conditions. 

The  passage  wherein  M.  Guerard,  in  a  concise  and  per- 
spicuous manner,  has  given  his  own  theory  as  to  the  gradual 
decline  of  servitude  deserves  to  be  extracted  ;  but  I  regret 
very  much  that  he  refers  to  another  work,  not  by  name,  and 
unknown  to  me,  for  the  full  proof  of  what  has  the  air  of  an 
historical  paradox.  With  sufficient  proof  every  paradox 
loses  its  name  ;  and  I  have  not  the  least  right,  from  any 
deep  researches  of  my  own,  to  call  in  question  the  testimony 
which  has  convinced  so  learned  and  diligent  an  inquirer. 

"  La  servitude,  comme  je  Fai  expose  dans  un  autre  travail, 
alia  toujours  chez  nous  en  s'adoucissant  jusqu'a  ce  qu'elle  fut 
entierement  abolie  a  la  chute  de  l'ancien  regime :  d'abord 
c'est  l'esclavage  a-peu-pres  pur,  qui  reduisait  l'homme  pres- 
que  a  l'etat  de  chose,  et  qui  le  mettait  dans  l'entiere  depen 
dance  de  son  maitre.  Cette  periode  peut  etre  prolongee 
jusqu'apres  la  conquete  de  l'empire  d'Occident  par  Les  bar- 
bares.  Depuis  cette  epoque  jusques  vers  la  fin  du  regne  de 
Charles-le-Chauve,  l'esclavage  proprement  dit  est  remplace 
par  la  servitude,  dans  laquelle  la  condition  huinaine  est  re- 
connue,  respectee,  protegee,  si  ce  n'est  encore  d'une  maniere 
suffisante,  par  les  loix  civiles,  au  moins  plus  efficacement  par 
celles  de  l'Eglise  et  par  les  mceurs  sociales.  Alors  le  pouvoir 
de  l'liomme  sur  son  semblable  est  contenu  generalement  dans 
certains  limites  ;  un  frein  est  mis  d'ordinaire  a  la  violence  ; 
la  regie  et  la  stabilite  l'emportent  sur  l'arbitraire :  bref,  la 
liberte  et  la  propriete  penetrent  par  quelque  enclroit  dans  la 
cabane  du  serf.    Enfin,  pendant  le  desordre  d'oii  sortit  triom- 


820  VILLEINAGE.  Notes  to 

phant  le  regime  feodal,  le  serf  soutient  centre  son  maitre  la 
lutte  sontenue  par  le  vassal  eontre  son  seigneur,  et  par  les 
seigneurs  eontre  le  roi.  Le  sucees  f'ut  le  me  me  de  pari  et 
d'autre  ;  l'usurpaticm  des  tenures  serviles  accompagna  celle 
des  tenures  liberates,  et  l'appropriation  territoriale  ayant  en 
lieu  partout,  dans  le  bas  comme  dans  le  liaut  de  la  society  il 
fut  aussi  difficile  de  deposseder  un  serf,  de  son  manse  qu'nn 
seigneur  de  son  benefice.  Des  ce  moment  la  servitude  fut 
transformer  en  servage ;  le  serf,  ayant  retire  sa  personne 
et  son  champ  des  mains  de  son  maitre,  dut  a  celui-ci  non 
plus  son  corps  ni  son  bien,  mais  seulement  une  partie  de 
son  travail  et  de  ses  revenus.  Des  ce  moment  il  a  cesse  de 
servir ;  il  n'est  plus  en  realite  qu'un  tributaire. 

u  Cette  grande  revolution,  qui  tira  de  son  etat  abject  la 
classe  la  plus  nombreuse  de  la  population,  et  qui  l'investit  de 
droits  civils,  lorsque  auparavant  elle  ne  pouvait  guere  in- 
voquer  en  sa  faveur  que  les  droits  de  l'humanite,  n'avait  pas 
encore  ete  signalee  dans  notre  bistoire.  Les  faits  qui  la  de- 
monstrent  ont  ete  developpe  dans  un  autre  travail  que  je  ne 
puis  reproduire  ici ;  mais  les  traces  seules  qu'elle  a  laissees 
dans  notre  Cartulaire  sont  assez  nombreuses  et  assez  profon- 
des  pour  la  faire  universellement  reconnaitre.  Elle  etait  depuis 
long-temps  consommee,  lorsque  le  moine  redigeait,  dans  la  sec- 
onde  moitie  du  xie.  siecle,  la  premiere  partie  du  present  recueil, 
et  lorsqu'il  declarait  que  les  anciens  roles  (ecrits  au  ixe.) 
conserves  dans  les  archives  de  l'Ahbaye,  n'accordent  aux 
paysans  ni  les  usages  ni  les  droits  dont  ils  jouissant  actuelle- 
ment.  Mais  ses  paroles  meritent  d'etre  repetees  :  — '  Lectori 
intima7,e  curavij'  dit-il  dans  sa  Preface,  '  quod  ea  quce  primo 
scripturus  sum  a  prcesenti  usu  admodum  discrepare  ridenti/r; 
nam  rolli  conscripti  ab  antiquis  et  in  armario  nostro  nunc 
reperii,  habuisse  minimi  ostendunt  zllius  temporis  rusticos 
has  consuetudines  in  reditibus  quas  modem i  rustici  in  hoc 
tempore  dinoscuntur  habere,  neque  habent  vocabida  rerum  quas 
tunc  sermo  habebat  vulgaris.'1  Ainsi  non  seulement  les  choses, 
mais  encore  les  noms,  tout  etait  change."  (Prolegomenes  a 
la  Cartulaire  de  Chartres,  p.  40.) 

The  characteristic  of  the  villein,  according  to  Beaumanoir, 
in  the  thirteenth  century,  that  his  obligations  were  fixed  in 
kind  and  degree,  would  thus  appear  to  have  hern  as  old  as 
the  eleventh.  Many  charters  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  cen- 
turies are  adduced  by  M.  Guerard,  wherein,  as  he  informs  us. 


Chap.  H.  VILLEINAGE.  321 

"On  s'efforce  de  se  soustraire  a  la  violence,  et  d'y  substitnei 
les  conventions  a  l'arbitraire  ;  la  regie  et  la  mesure  tendenl 
a  s'introduire  partout  et  jusques  dan-  les  extortions  memes" 
(p.  109).  But  this  principle  of  limited  rent  was  also  that  of 
the  Roman  system  with  respect  to  the  coloni  before  the  con- 
quest of  Gaul  by  Clovis.  Nor  do  we  know  that  it  was  differ- 
ent afterwards.  No  law  at  least  could  have  effected  it ;  for 
the  Roman  law,  by  which  the  coloni  were  ruled,  underwent 
no  change. 

M.  Guerard  seems  hardly  to  have  taken  a  just  view  of  the 
status  of  the  Roman  tributary  or  colonus.  "Nous  avons  dit 
que  les  personnes  de  condition  servile  s'etaient  appropries  leurs 
benefices.  Ce  que  vient  encore  nous  confirmer  dans  cette  opin- 
ion, c'est  le  changement  qu'on  observe  generalement  dans  la  con- 
dition dcs  terres  depuis  le  declin  du  xe  siecle.  La  terre,  apres 
avoir  ete  cultivee  dans  l'antiquite  par  l'esclave  au  profit  ck 
son  maitre,  le  fut  ensuite  par  un  espece  de  fermier  non  libre 
qui  partageait  avec  le  proprietaire,  ou  qui  faisait  les  fruits 
siens,  moyennant  certains  cens  et  services,  auxquels  il  etait 
oblige  envers  lui :  c'est  l'etat  qui  nous  est  represente  par  le 
Polyptyque  d'lrminon,  au  temps  de  Charlemagne,  et  qui  dura 
encore  un  siecle  et  demi  environ  apres  la  mort  de  ce  grand 
prince.  Puis  commence  une  troisieme  periode,  pendant  la- 
quelle  le  proprietaire,  n'est  plus  que  seigneur,  tandis  que  le 
tenancier  est  devenu  lui-meme  proprietaire,  et  paie,  non  plus 
de  fermages,  mais  settlement  des  droits  seigneuriaux.  Ainsi, 
d'abord  obligations  d'un  esclave  envers  un  maitre  ensuite  ob- 
ligations d'un  fermier  ncn  libre  envers  un  proprietaire  ;  enfin, 
obligations  d'un  proprietaire  non  libre  envers  un  seigneur. 
C'est  a  la  derniere  periode  que  nous  sommes  parvenus  dans 
notre  Cartulaire.  Les  populations  s'ymontrent  en  jouissance 
du  droit  de  propriete,  et  ne  sont  soumises,  a  raison  des  posses- 
sions, qu'a  de  simples  charges  feodales." 

It  may  be  observed  upon  this,  that  the  colonus  was  a  free 
man,  whether  he  divided  the  produce  with  his  lord,  like  the 
metayer  of  modern  times,  or  paid  a  certain  rent ;  and,  sec- 
ondly, that,  in  what  he  calls  the  third  period,  the  tenant,  if  he 
was  a  villein  or  homme  de  poote,  could  not  possibly  be  called 
"  lui-meme  proprietaire  ; "  nor  were  his  liabilities  feudal,  but 
either  a  money-rent  or  personal  service  in  labor ;  which  can- 
not be  denominated  feudal  without  great  impropriety. 

"  II  est  vrai,"  he  proceeds,  "  que  ces  charges  sont  encore 
vol.  i.  —  m.  21 


322  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  Noxits  to 

lourdes  et  son  sent  accablantes,  et  que  les  biens  ne  Bont  pas 
plus  que  les  personnes  entierement  francs  el  libres ;  ni  sulfi- 
samment  a  I'abri  de  l'arbitraire  el  de  la  violence:  mais  la 
iiberte,  acquiso  de  jour  en  jour  a  l'homme,  Be  communiquait 
de  plus  en  plus  a  la  terre.  Le  paysan  etanl  proprie'taire,  il 
ne  lui  restail  qu'a  degrerer  et  affranchir  la  proprie'te.  C'est 
a  eel  oeuvre  qu'il  travaillera  ddsormais  avec  perseverance  et 
de  toutes  ses  forces,  jusqu'a  ce  qu'il  ait  enlin  obtenu  de  ne 
supporter  d'autres  charges  que  cellos  qui  convienent  a 
l'homme  libre,  et  qui  sonl  uniquement  fondles  sur  Futilite 
commune." 

In  this  passage  the  tenant  is  made  much  more  to  resemble 
the  free  socager  of  England  than  the  villein  or  homo  posta- 
tis  of  Pierre  des  Fontaines  or  Beaumanoir.  This  latter  class, 
however,  was  certainly  numerous  in  their  age,  and  could 
hardly  have  been  less  so  some  centuries  before.  These  were 
subject  to  so  many  onerous  restriction-,  independent  of  their 
compulsory  residence  on  the  land,  and  independently  also  of 
their  want  of  ability  to  resist  undue  exactions,  that  they  were 
always  eager  to  purchase  their  own  enfranchisement.  Their 
marriages  were  not  valid  without  the  lord's  consent,  till  Adrian 
IV.,  in  the  twelfth  century,  declared  them  indissoluble.  A 
freeman  marrying  a  serf  became  one  himself,  as  did  their 
children.  They  were  liable  to  occasional  as  well  as  regular 
demands,  that  is,  to  tallages,  sometimes  in  a  very  arbitrary 
manner.  It  was  probably  the  less  frequency  of  such  de- 
mands, among  other  reasons,  that  rendered  the  condition  of 
ecclesiastical  tenants  more  eligible  than  that  of  others.  Man- 
umissions of  serfs  by  the  church  were  very  common  ;  and, 
indeed,  the  greater  part  that  have  been  preserved,  as  may  be 
expected,  come  from  ecclesiastical  repositories.  It  is  observed 
in  my  text  that  the  English  clergy  are  said  to  have  been  slow 
in  liberating  their  villeins.  But  a  villein  in  England  was 
real  property ;  and  I  conceive  that  a  monastery  could  not  en- 
franchise him,  at  least  without  the  consent  of  some  superior 
authority,  any  more  than  it  could  alienate  its  lands.  The 
church  were  not  generally  accounted  harsh  masters. 

Note  XVI.     Pages  213,  214. 

There  would  seem  naturally  little  doubt  that  ma  jorum  can 
mean  nothing  but  the  higher  classes  of  clergy  and  laity,  ex- 


Jhap.  II.  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  323 

elusive  of  parish  priests   and  ordinary  freemen,  were  it  not 
that  a  part  of  these  very  majores  are  afterwards  designated 
by  the  name  minores.     Who,  it  may  be  asked,  could  be  the 
majores  clerici,  except  prelates  and  abbots  ?     And  of  these, 
how  could  one  be  so  inferior  in  degree   to  another  as   to  be 
reckoned  among  minores  ?    It  may  perhaps  be  answered  that 
there  was  nevertheless  a  difference  of  importance,  though  not 
of  rank.     Guizot  translates  majores  "  le's  grands,"  and  mino- 
res "les  moins  considerables."     But  upon  this  construction 
which  certainly  is  what   the    words  fairly  bear,  none  but  a 
class  denominated  majores,  relatively  to  the  rest  of  the  nation, 
were  members  of  the  national  council.     I  think,  nevertheless, 
that  Guizot,  on  any  hypothesis,  has  too  much  depreciated  the 
authority  of  these  general  meetings,  wherein  the  capitularies 
of  Charlemagne  were  enacted.     Grant,  against  Mably,  that 
they  were  not   a  democratic  assembly ;  still  were  they  not  a 
legislature  ?    "  Lex  consensu  fit  populi  et  constitutione  regis." 
This  is  our  own  statute  language  ;  but  does  it  make  parlia- 
ment of  no  avail?    "  En  lui  (Charlemagne)  reside  la  volonte 
et  l'impulsion  ;  e'est  de  lui  que  toute  emane  pour  revenir  a 
lui."     (Essais  sur  1'Hist.  de  France,  p.  323.)     This  is  only 
to  say  that  he  was  a  truly  great  man,  and  that  his  subjects 
were  semi-barbarians,  comparatively  unfit  to  devise  methods 
of  ruling  the  empire.     No  one  can  doubt  that  he  directed 
everything.     But  a  weaker  sovereign  soon  found  these  rude 
nobles  an  overmatch  for  him.     It  is,  moreover,  well  pointed 
out  by  Sir  F.  Palgrave,  that  we  find  instances  of   petitions 
presented  by  the  lay  or  spiritual  members  of  these  assemblies 
to  Charlemagne,  upon  which  capitularies  or  edicts  were  after- 
wards founded.      (English  Commonwealth,  ii.  411.)     It  is  to 
be  inferred,  from  several  texts  in  the  capitularies  of  Charle- 
magne and  his  family,  that  a  general  consent  was  required  to 
their  legislative  constitutions,  and  that  without  this  a  capitu- 
lary did  not  become  a  law.     It  is  not,  however,  quite  so  clear 
in  what  method  this  was  testified  ;  or  rather  two  methods  ap- 
pear  to   be   indicated.      One    was  that   above  described  by 
Hincmar,  when  the  determination  of  the  seniores  was  referred 
to  the    minores  for  their  confirmation :    "  interdum    pariter 
tractandum,  et  non  ex  potestate  sed  ex  proprio  mentis  intel- 
lectu  vel  sententia  eonfirmandum."     The  point  of  divergence 
between  two  schools  of  constitutional  antiquaries  in  France  is 
on  the  words  ex  potestate.     Mably,  and  others  whom  I  have 


324  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLIES.  Notes  tu 

followed,  say  h  not  by  compulsion,"  or  words  to  that  effect 
But  Guizot  renders  the  words  differently  :  "  quelquefois  on 
deliberait  aussi,  et  les  confirmaient,  non  par  un  consentement 
fonnel,  mais  par  leur  opinion,  et  l'adhesion  de  leur  intelli- 
gence." The  Latin  idiom  will,  I  conceive,  bear  either  con- 
struction. But  the  context,  as  well  as  the  analogy  of  other 
authorities,  inclines  me  to  the  more  popular  interpretation, 
which,  though  the  more  popular,  does  not  necessarily  carry 
us  beyond  the  word  majores,  taking  that  as  descriptive  of  a 
numerous  aristocracy. 

If,  indeed,  we  are  so  much  bound  by  the  majorum  in  this 
passage  of  Hinemar  as  to  take  for  merely  loose  phrases  the 
continual  mention  of  the  populus  in  the  capitularies,  we  could 
not  establish  any  theory  of  popular  consent  in  legislation 
from  the  general  placita  held  almo-t  every  May  by  Charle- 
magne. They  would  be  conventions  of  an  aristocracy ; 
numerous  indeed,  and  probably  comprehending  by  right 
all  the  vassals  of  the  crown,  but  excluding  the  freemen  or 
petty  alodialists,  not  only  from  deliberating  upon  public  laws, 
but  from  consenting  to  them.  We  find,  however,  several 
proofs  of  another  method  of  obtaining  the  ratification  of  this 
class,  that  is  of  the  Frank  people.  I  do  not  allude  to  the 
important  capitulary  of  Louis  (though  I  cannot  think  that  M. 
Guizot  has  given  it  sufficient  weight),  wherein  the  count  is 
directed  to  bring  twelve  Scabini  with  him  to  the  imperial 
placitum,  because  we  are  chiefly  at  present  referring  to  the 
reign  of  Charlemagne ;  and  yet  this  provision  looks  like  one 
of  his  devising.  The  scheme  to  which  I  refer  is  different 
and  less  satisfactory.  The  capitulary  determined  upon  by  a 
national  placitum  was  sent  round  to  the  counts,  who  were  to 
read  it  in  their  own  mallus  to  the  people,  and  obtain  their 
confirmation.  Thus  in  803,  "Anno  tertio  clementissimi  domi- 
ni  nostri  Karoli  Augusti,  sub  ipso  anno  ha3c  facta  capitula 
sunt,  et  consignata  Stephano  comiti,  ut  haec  manifesta  faceret 
in  civitate  Parisiis,  mallo  publico,  et  ilia  legere  faceret  coram 
Scabiniis,  quod  ita  et  fecit.  Et  omnes  in  uno  consenserunt, 
quod  ipsi  voluissent  omni  tempore  observare  usque  in  poste- 
rum.  Etiam  omnes  Scabinii,  Episcopi,  Abbates,  Comites 
manu  propria  subter  signaverunt."  (Rec.  des  Hist.  v.  663.) 
No  text  can  be  more  perspicuous  than  this;  but  several  other 
proofs   might  be  given,  extending   to   I  lie  subsequent  reigns. 

Sir  F.  Palgraye  is,  perhaps,  the  first  who  has  drawn  a*« 


Chap.  H.  ROYAL  TRIBUNALS  325 

tention  to  this  scheme  of  local  sanction  by  the  people ;  though 
I  must  think  that  he  has  somewhat  obscured  the  subject  by 
supposing  the  malli,  wherein  the  capitulary  was  confirmed, 
to  have  been  those  of  separate  nations  constituting  the  Frank 
empire,  instead  of  being  determined  by  the  territorial  juris- 
diction of  each  count.  He  gives  a  natural  interpretation  to 
the  famous  words,  "  Lex  consensu  populi  fit,  constitutione 
regis."  The  capitulary  was  a  constitution  of  the  king, 
though  not  without  the  advice  of  his  great  men ;  the  law  was 
its  confirmation  by  the  nation  collectively,  in  the  great  placi- 
tum  of  the  Field  of  March,  or  by  separate  consent  and  sub- 
scription in  each  county. 

We  are  not,  however,  to  be  confident  that  this  assent  of 
the  people  in  their  county  courts  was  virtually  more  than 
nominal.  A  little  consideration  will  show  that  it  could  not 
easily  have  been  otherwise,  except  in  the  strongest  cases  of 
unpopular  legislation.  No  Scabini  or  Rachimburgii  in  one 
county  knew  much  of  what  passed  at  a  distance ;  and 
dissatisfaction  must  have  been  universal  before  it  could 
have  found  its  organ  in  such  assemblies.  Before  that 
time  arrived  rebellion  was  a  more  probable  effect.  One 
capitulary,  of  823,  does  not  even  allude  to  consent :  "  In  suis 
comitatibus  coram  omnibus  relegant,  ut  cunctis  nostra  ordi- 
natio  et  voluntas  nota  fieri  possit."  But  we  cannot  set  this 
against  the  language  of  so  many  other  capitularies,  which 
imply  a  formal  ratification. 

Note  XVII.     Page  242. 

The  court  of  tne  palace  possessed  a  considerable  jurisdic- 
tion from  the  earliest  times.  We  have  its  judgments  under 
the  Merovingian  kings.  Thus  in  a  diploma  of  Clovis  III., 
A.D.  693,  dated  at  Valenciennes  —  "Cum  ad  universorum 
causas  audiendas  vel  recta  judicia  terminanda  resideremus.'' 
(Rec.  des  Hist.  iv.  672.)  Under  the  house  of  Charlemagne 
it  is  fully  described  by  Hincmar  in  the  famous  passage  above 
mentioned.  It  was  not  so  much  in  form  a  court  of  appeal  as 
one  acting  by  the  sovereign's  authority,  to  redress  the  oppres- 
sion of  the  subject  by  inferior  magistrates.  Mr.  Allen  has 
well  rejected  the  singular  opinion  of  Meyer,  that  an  errone- 
ous or  corrupt  judgment  of  the  inferior  court  was  not  revers- 
ible  by   this    royal    tribunal,    though    the    judges    might   be 


*26  ROYAL  TRIBUNALS.  Notes  to 

punished  for  giving  it.  (Inquiry  into  Royal  Prerogative, 
Appendix,  p.  2D.)  Though,  according  to  what  is  said  by  M. 
Beugnot.  the  appeal  was  not  made  in  regular  form,  we  cannot 
doubt  that,  where  the  case  of  injury  by  the  interior  judge 
was  made  out,  justice  would  be  done  by  annulling  his  sen- 
tence. The  emperor  or  king  often  presided  here;  or,  in  his 
absence,  the  count  of  the  palace.  Bishops,  counts,  household 
officers,  and  others  constituted  this  court,  which  is  not  to  be 
confounded  with  that  of  the  seneschal,  having  only  a  local 
jurisdiction  over  the  domains  of  the  crown,  and  which  did 
not  continue  under  the  house  of  Capet.  (Beugnot,  Registres 
des  Arrets,  vol.  i.  p.  15,  18,  in  Documens  Inedits,  1839.) 

This  tribunal,  the  court  of  the  palace,  was  not  founded 
upon  any  feudal  principle  ;  and  when  the  right  of  territorial 
justice  and  the  subordination  of  fiefs  came  to  be  thoroughly 
established,  it  ought,  according  to  analogy,  to  have  been 
replaced  by  one  wherein  none  but  the  great  vassals  of  France 
should  have  sat.  Such,  however,  was  not  the  case.  This  is 
a  remarkable  anomaly,  and  a  proof  that  the  spirit  of  mon- 
archy was  not  wholly  extinguished.  For,  weak  as  wras  the 
crown  under  the  first  Capets,  their  court,  though  composed 
of  persons  by  no  means  the  peers  of  all  wrho  wrere  amenable 
to  it,  gave  several  judgments  affecting  some  considerable 
feudataries,  such  as  the  count  of  Anjou  under  Robert.  (Id. 
p.  22.)  No  court  composed  only  of  great  vassals  appears  in 
the  eleventh  or  twelfth  centuries  ;  no  notion  of  judicial  subor- 
dination prevailed ;  the  vassals  of  the  crown  sat  with  those 
of  the  duchy  of  France ;  and  latterly  even  clerks  came  in  as 
assessors  or  advisers,  though  without  suffrage  (p.  31).  But 
an  important  event  brought  forward,  for  the  first  time,  the 
true  feudal  principle.  This  was  the  summons  of  John,  as 
duke  of  Normandy,  to  justify  himself  as  to  the  death  of 
Arthur.  It  has  been  often  said  that  twelve  peers  of  France 
had  appeared  at  the  coronation  of  Philip  Augustus,  in  1179 
This,  however,  a  late  writer  has  denied,  and  does  not  place 
them  higher  than  the  proceedings  against  John,  in  1204. 
(Id.  p.  44.)  In  civil  causes,  as  has  above  been  said,  there 
had  been  several  instances  wherein  the  king's  court  had 
pronounced  judgment  against  vassals  of  the  crown.  The  idea 
had  gained  ground  that  the  king,  by  virtue  of  his  full  pre- 
rogative, communicated  to  all  who  sat  in  that  court  a  portion 
of  his  own  sovereignty.    Such  an  opinion  would  be  sanctioned 


Chap.  II.  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  327 

by  the  bishops,  and  by  all  who  leaned  towards  the  imperial 
theory  of  government,  never  quite  eradicated  in  the  church. 
But  the  high  rank  of  John,,  and  the  important  consequences 
likely  to  result  from  his  condemnation,  forbade  any  irregularity 
of  which  advantage  might  be  taken.  John  is  always  said  to 
have  been  sentenced,  '"judicio  parium  suorum;"  whence  we 
may  conclude  that  inferior  lords  did  not  take  a  part.  (Id. 
ibid.)  And  from  that  time  we  find  abundant  proofs  of  the 
peerage  of  France,  composed  of  six  lay  and  six  spiritual 
persons ;  though  upon  this  supposition  Normandy  was  never 
a  substantial  member  of  that  class,  having  only  appeared  for 
a  moment,  to  vanish  in  the  next,  by  its  reunion  to  the  domain. 
The  feudal  principle  seemed  now  to  have  recovered 
strength:  a  right  which  the  vassals  had  never  enjoyed, 
though  in  consistency  their  due,  was  formally  conceded.  But 
it  was  too  late  in  the  thirteenth  century  to  render  any  new 
privilege  available  against  the  royal  power.  Though  it  was 
from  that  time  an  uncontested  right  of  the  peers  to  be  tried 
by  some  of  their  order,  this  was  construed  so  as  not  to  ex- 
clude others,  in  any  number,  and  with  equivalent  suffrage. 
One  or  more  peers  being  present,  the  court  was,  in  a  later 
phrase,  "  suffisamment  garnie  de  pairs  ; "  and  thus  the  lives 
and  rights  of  the  dukes  of  Guienne  or  Burgundy  were  at  the 
mercy  of  mere  lawyers. 

Note  XVIII.     Page  249. 

Savigny,  in  his  History  of  Roman  Law  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  Raynouard,  in  his  Histoire  du  Droit  Municipal 
(1828),  have,  since  the  first  publieation  of  this  work  in  1818, 
traced  the  continuance  of  municipal  institutions,  in  several 
French  cities,  from  the  age  of  the  Roman  empire  to  the 
twelfth  century,  when  the  formal  charters  of  communities 
first  appear.'  But  it  will  render  the  subject  clearer  if  we 
look  at  the  constitution  which  Rome  gave  to  the  cities  of 
Italy,  and  ultimately  of  the  provinces.  We  are  not  concerned 
with  the  privileges  of  Roman  citizenship,  whether  local  or 
personal,  but  with  those  appertaining  to  each  city.  These 
were  originally  founded  on  the  republican  institutions  of 
Rome  herself;  the  supreme  power,  so  far  as  it  was  conceded, 
and  the  choice  of  magistrates,  rested  with  the  assembly  of 
the  citizens.     But  after  Tiberius   took  this  away  from  the 


328  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.  Notes  t« 

Roman  comitia  to  vest  it  in  the  senate,  it  appears  'hat,  either 
through  imitation  or  by  some  imperial  edict,  this  example  was 
followed  in  every  provincial  city.  We  find  everywhere  a 
class  named  "  curiales,"  or  "decuriones  "  (synonymous  words), 
in  whom,  or  in  those  elected  by  them,  resided  whatever  au- 
thority was  not  reserved  to  the  proconsul  or  other  Roman 
magistrate.  Though  these  words  occur  in  early  writers,  it 
must  be  admitted  that  our  chief  knowledge  of  the  internal 
constitution  of  provincial  cities  is  derived  from  the  rescripts 
of  the  later  emperors,  especially  in  the  Theodosian  code. 

The  decurions  are  several  times  mentioned  by  Pliny 
In  Greek  or  Asiatic  towns  the  word  j3ovXtj  answered  to  curia, 
and  ftovfavTTjc  to  decurio.  Pliny  refers  to  a  lex  Pompeia, 
probably  of  the  great  Pompey,  which  appears  to  have  regu- 
lated the  internal  constitution,  at  least  of  the  Pontic  and 
Bithynian  cities.  ■  According  to  this,  the  members  of  the 
council,  or  0ovXrj,  were  named  by  certain  censors,  to  whose 
list  the  emperor,  in  the  time  of  Pliny,  added  a  few  by 
especial  favor.  (Plin.  Epist.  x.  113.)  In  later  times  the 
decurions  are  said  to  have  chosen  their  own  members,  which 
can  mean  little  more  than  that  the  form  of  election  was 
required,  for  birth  or  property  gave  an  inchoate  title.  They 
were  a  local  aristocracy,1  requiring  perhaps  originally  the 
qualification  of  wealth,  which  in  the  time  of  Pliny,  at  least 
in  Asia,  was  of  a  hundred  thousand  sesterces,  or  about  800/. 
(Epist.  i.  19.)  But  latterly  it  appears  that  every  son  of  a 
decurion  inherited  the  rights  as  well  as  the  liabilities  of  his 
father.  We  read,  "  qui  origine  sunt  curiales,"  and  "  honor 
quern  nascendo  meruit."  Property,  however,  gave  a  similar 
title ;  every  one  possessing  twenty-five  jugera  of  freehold 
ought  to  be  inscribed  in  the  order.  This  title,  honorable  to 
Roman  ears,  ordo  decurionum,  or  simply  ordo,  is  always 
applied  to  them.  They  were  summoned  on  the  Kalends  of 
March  to  choose  municipal  officers,  of  whom  the  most  re- 
markable were  the  duumvirs,  answering  to  the  consuls  of 
the  imperial  city.  These  possessed  a  slight  degree  of  civil 
and  criminal  jurisdiction,  and  were  bound  to  maintain  the 
peace.  They  belonged,  however,  only  to  cities  enjoying  the 
jus  Ralicum,  a  distinction  into  which  we  need  not  now  in- 
quire;  and  Savigny  maintains  that,  in  Gaul  especially,  which 

1  Though  T  use  this  word,  which  ex-    of  law,  the  decurions  were  "  nulla  rraeditf 
■■•flscii  a  geneitl  truth,  yet,  iu  strictness    digoitate."     (Cod.  Theod.  12,  1,  6  ' 


Shap.  II.  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.  323 

we  chiefly  regard,  no  local  magistrate,  in  a  proper  sense^ 
ever  existed,  the  whole  jurisdiction  devolving  on  the  impe- 
rial officers.  This  is  far  from  the  representation  of  Raynou- 
ard,  who,  though  writing  after  Savigny,  seems  ignorant  of 
his  work,  nor  has  it  been  adopted  by  later  French  inquirers. 
But  another  institution  is  highly  remarkable,  and  does 
peculiar  honor  to  the  great  empire  which  established  it,  that 
of  Defensor  Civitatis  —  a  standing  advocate  for  the  city 
against  the  oppression  of  the  provincial  governor.  His 
office  is  only  known  by  the  laws  from  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  the  earliest  being  of  Valentinian  and  Valens, 
in  365 ;  but  both  Cicero  (Epist.  xii.  56)  and  Pliny  (Epist. 
x.  3)  mention  an  Ecdicus  with  something  like  the  same 
functions ;  and  Justinian  always  uses  that  word  to  express 
the  Defensor  Civitatis.  He  was  chosen  for  five  years,  not 
by  the  curiales,  but  by  the  citizens  at  large.  Nor  could  any 
decurion  be  defensor ;  he  was  to  be  taken  "  ex  aliis  idoneis 
personis;"  which  Raynouard  translates,  "among  the  most 
distinguished  inhabitants;"  a  sense  neither  necessary  nor 
probable.  (Cod.  Theod.  i.  tit.  xi. ;  Du  Cange ;  Troja,  in. 
1066;  Raynouard,  i.  71.) 

The  duties  of  the  defensor  will  best  appear  by  a  passage 
in  a  rescript  of  a.d.  385,  inserted  in  the  Code  of  Justinian :  — 
"  Scilicet,  ut  in  primis  parentis  vicem  plebi  exhibeas,  descrip- 
tionibus  rusticos  urbanosque  non  patiaris  affligi ;  officialism 
insolentise  et  judicum  procacitati,  salva  reverentia  pudoris, 
occurras;  ingrediendi  cum  voles  ad  judicem  liberam  habeas 
facultatem ;  super  exigendi  damna,  vel  spolia  plus  petentium 
ab  his  quos  liberorum  loco  tueri  debes,  excludas ;  nee  patiaris 
quidquam  ultra  delegationem  solitam  ab  his  exigi,  quos  certum 
est  nisi  tali  remedio  non  posse  reparari."  (Cod.  i.  55,  4.) 
But  the  Defensores  were  also  magistrates  and  preservers  ot 
order: —  «  Per  omnes  regiones  in  quibus  fera  et  periculi  sui 
nescia  latronam  fervet  insania,  probatissimi  quique  et  dis- 
trictissimi  defensores  adsint  disciplina3,  et  quotidianis  actibus 
prsesint,  qui  non  sinant  crimina  impunita  coalescere.;  remove- 
ant  patrocinia  quae  favorem  reis,  et  auxilium  scelerosis  lm 
partiendo,  maturari  seelera  fecerunt."  (Id.  i.  55,  6.  See, 
too,  Theod.  ubi  supra.) 

It  may  naturally  be  doubted  whether  the  principles  ^  of 
freedom  and  justice,  which  dictated  these  municipal  institu- 
tions of  the  empire,  were  fully  carried  out   in  effect.     Per 


330  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT  Notes  tx> 

haps  it  might  be  otherwise  even  in  the  best  times  —  those  of 
Trajan  and  the  Antonines.  Bui  in  the  decline  of  the  empire 
we  find  a  striking  revolution  in  the  condition  of  the  decurions. 
Those  evil  days  rendered  necessary  an  immense  pressure  of 
taxation;  and  the  artificial  scheme  of  imperial  policy,  intro- 
duced by  Diocletian  and  perfected  by  Constantine,  had  for 
its  main  object  to  drain  the  resources  of  the  provinces  for  the 
imperial  treasury.  The  decurions  were  made  liable  to  such 
heavy  burdens,  their  responsibility  for  local  as  well  as  public 
charges  was  so  extensive  (in  every  case  their  private  estates 
being  required  to  make  up  the  deficiency  in  the  general  tax), 
that  the  barren  honors  of  the  office  afforded  no  compensation, 
and  many  endeavored  to  shun  them.  This  responsibility, 
indeed,  of  the  decurions,  and  their  obligation  to  remain  in 
the  city  of  the  domicile,  as  well  as  their  frequent  desire  to 
escape  from  the  burdens  of  their  lot,  is  manifest  even  in  the 
Digest,  that  is,  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  (when 
the  opinions  of  the  lawyers  therein  collected  were  given), 
while  the  empire  was  yet  unscathed ;  but  the  evil  became  more 
flagrant  in  subsequent  times.  The  laws  of  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries,  in  (lie  Theodosian  code,  perpetually  compel 
the  decurions,  under  severe  penalties,  to  remain  at  home  and 
undergo  their  onerous  duties.  These  laws  are  192  in  num- 
ber, filling  the  first  title  of  the  twelfth  book  of  that  code. 
Guizot  indeed,  Savigny,  and  even  Raynouard  (though  his  bias 
is  always  to  magnify  municipal  institutions),  have  drawn 
from  this  source  such  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  the  decurions 
in  the  last  two  centuries  of  the  western  empire,  that  we  are 
almost  at  a  loss  to  reconcile  this  absolute  impoverishment  of 
their  order  with  other  facts  which  apparently  bear  witness  to 
a  better  state  of  society.  For,  greatly  fallen  as  the  decurions 
of  the  provincial  cities  must  be  deemed,  in  comparison  with 
their  earlier  condition,  there  was  still,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  fifth  century,  especially  in  Gaul,  a  liberal  class  of  good 
family,  and  not  of  ruined  fortunes,  dwelling  mostly  in  cities, 
or  sometimes  in  villas  or  country  houses  not  remote  from 
cities,  from  whom  the  church  was  replenished,  and  who  kept 
up  the  politeness  and  luxury  of  the  empire.1  The  senators 
or  senatorial  families  are  often  mentioned;  and  by  the  latter 

1  The   letters  of  Sidonius   Apolliuari.s  have  been  much  better  before.     Salvian, 

bear  abundant   testimony  to  this,  oven  too,  in  his  declamation  against  the  vices 

for  his  age,  which  was  after  the  middle  of  of  the  provincials,  gives  us  to  understauJ 

ha  century  ;  and  the  state  of  Gaul  must  that  they  were  the  vices  of  wealth 


Chap.  II.  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  331 

term  we  perceive  that  an  hereditary  nobility,  whatever  mi^ht 
be  the  case  with  some  of  the  barbarian  nations,  subsisted  in 
public  estimation,  if  not  in  privilege,  among  their  Roman 
subjects.  The  word  senate  appears  to  be  sometimes  used 
for  the  curia  at  large ; 1  but  when  Ave  find  senatorius  ordo, 
or  senator ium  genus,  we  may  refer  it  to  the  higher  class,  who 
had  served  municipal  offices,  or  had  become  privileged  by 
imperial  favor,  and  to  whom  the  title  of  "  clarissimi "  legally 
belonged.  It  seems  probable  that  this  appellative  senator, 
rather  than  senior,  has  given  rise  to  seigneur,  sire,  and  the 
like  in  modern  languages.  The  word  senatorius  appears 
early  to  have  acquired  the  meaning  noble  or  gentlemanlike  : 
though  I  do  not  find  this  in  the  dictionaries.  This  is,  I  con- 
ceive, what  Pliny  means  by  the  "  quidam  senatorius  decor," 
which  he  ascribes  to  his  young  son-in-law  Aeilianus.  (Epist 
i.  14.)  It  is  the  air  noble,  the  indescribable  look,  rarely  met 
with  except  in  persons  of  good  birth  and  liberal  habits.  In 
the  age  of  Pliny  this  could  only  refer  to  the  Roman  senate.* 
A  great  number  of  laws  in  this  copious  title  of  the  Theo- 
dosian  code,  many  of  which  are  cited  by  Raynouard  (vol.  i.  p. 
80),  manifest  a  distinction  between  the  curia  and  the  senate, 
or,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  "nobilissima  curia;"  and 
though  perhaps,  in  certain  instances,  they  may  be  referred  to 
the  great  senates  of  Rome  or  Constantinople,  which  were  the 
fountains  of  all  provincial  dignity  of  this  kind,  there  are  oth- 
ers which  can  only  be  explained  on  the  supposition  that  they 
relate  to  decurions,  as  it  were  emeriti,  and  promoted  to  a 
higher  rank.  Thus,  one  of  Valentinian  and  Valens,  in  364, 
which  is  the  earliest  that  seems  explicit :  —  "  Nemo  ad  ordi- 
nem  senatorium  ante  functionem  omnium  munerum  munici- 
palium  senator  accedat.  Cum  autem  universis  transactis, 
patriae  stipendia  fuerit  emensus,  turn  eum  ita  ordinis  senatorii 
complexus    excipiet,  ut    reposcentium    civium    flagitatio    non 

i  This  was  rather  by  analogy  than  in  2  i  presume  that  Sidonius  ApoMnaria 
strictness:  thus,  "  Suse,  si  sic  did  oportet,  means  something  complimentary  where 
curias  senatorem."     (Lib.  12,  tit.  1,  lex  he  says  — "  Prandebamus  breviter,  copi- 
85.)     But  perhaps  the  language  in  differ-  ose,  senatorium  ad  morem;  quo  insirum 
ent  parts  of  the  empire,  or  in  different  institutumque  multas  epulas  paucis  pa- 
periods,  might  not  be  the  same.    The  law  ropsidibus  apponi."  —  Epist.  ii.  9. 
just  cited  is  of  Arcadius.     But  Majorian  The  hereditary  nobility  of  the  senate, 
says,  in  the  next  age  and  in  the  West,  of  implying  purity  "of  blood,  was  recognized 
the  curiales,  "  Quorum  coetum  recte  ap-  very  early   in  "imperial   Home.     By    tha 
pellavit  antiquitas  minorem  senatum."  lex  Julia,  the  descendants  of  senators  t<? 
(Gothofred,  in  leg.  85.  supra  citat.)   Some  the  fourth  generation  were  incapable  of 
modern  writers  too  much  confound  all  marrying  libertina.  --Dig.  xxiii.  2   44. 
who  are  denominated  senators  with  the 
c  uriales 


332  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  Notes  to 

fatiget."  (Lex.  lvii.)  The  second  title  of  the  sixth  book  of 
the  Theodosian  code,  "De  Senatoribus,"  is  unfortunately  Iom  ; 
but  Gothofred  has  restored  a  Paratitlon  from  other  parts  of 
the  same  code,  and  especially  from  the  title  above  mentioned, 
in  the  twelfth  book,  by  reference  to  which  this  part  of  the 
imperial  constitution  will  be  best  understood.  It  appears  dif- 
ficult to  explain  every  passage.  But  on  the  whole  we  cannot 
hesitate  to  agree  with  Guizot  and  Savigny,  that  the  name  of 
senator  was  given  to  a  privileged  class  in  the  provincial  cit- 
ies, who,  having  served  through  all  the  public  functions  of 
the  curia,  were  entitled  to  a  legal  exemption  in  future,  and 
ascended  to  the  dignity  of  "  Clarissimi."  Many  others,  inde- 
pendent of  the  decurions,  obtained  this  rather  by  the  empe- 
ror's favor,  or  by  the  performance  of  duties  which  regularly 
led  to  it.  They  were  nominated  by  the  emperor,  and  might 
be  removed  by  him  ;  but  otherwise  their  rank  was  hereditary. 
Those  decurions,  therefore,  who  could  bear  the  burdens  of 
municipal  liabilities  without  impoverishment,  rose  so  far 
above  them  that  their  families  were  secure  in  wealth  as  well 
as  privilege.  Thus  the  word  senator  must  be  taken,  in  rela- 
tion to  them,  as  merely  an  aristocratic  distinction,  without 
regard  to  its  original  sense.1  It  is  sufficiently  clear  that  sen- 
atorial families,  by  whatever  means  separated  from  the  rest, 
constituted  the  nobility  of  Gaul.  Tims  we  read  in  Gregory  of 
Tours  (lib.  ii.  c.  21,  sub  ann.  475)  —  "  Sidonius  vir  secun- 
dum saeculi  dignitatem  nobilissimus,  et  de  primis  Galliarum 
senatoribus,  ita  ut  filiam  sibi  Aviti  imperatoris  in  matrimonio 
sociarit."  Another  is  called  "  vir  valde  nobilis  et  de  primis 
senatoribus  Galliarum."  Other  passages  from  the  same  his- 
torian might  be  adduced.  But  this  is  not  to  our  immediate 
purpose,  which  is  to  trace  briefly  the  state  of  municipal  insti- 
tutions in  Gaul.  The  senatorial  order,  or  Roman  provincial 
nobility,  of  which  we  have  just  been  speaking,  is  different. 
Raynouard,  the  diligent  elucidator  of  this  great  question, 
answers  the  very  specious  objection  of  Mably,  drawn  from  the 
silence  of  the  capitularies,  which,  though  addressed  to  many 
classes  of  magistrates,  never  mention  any  peculiar  to  the  cit- 
ies, by  observing  that  these  capitularies  were  not  designed  for 

1  For  this  distinction  between  curiales  all  of  which  throw  some  light  upon,  or 

and  senatorfs   the   reader  may   consult  relate   to,    this   rather  obscure   subject, 

the  title  of  the  Theodosian  code  on  De-  Guizot,  Savigny,  and  Raynouard  are  tb« 

eurions,  above  cited,  Leg.  82,  90,  93,  108,  modern  guides. 
110,  111,  118,  122, 129, 130,  180,  182,  183; 


Chap.  H.  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  333 

those  who  lived  by  the  Roman  law.  (Vol.  ii.  p.  160.)  Sa- 
vigny  had  already  made  the  same  remark.  There  seems  to 
be  some  force  in  this  answer ;  and  at  least  it  is  impossible  to 
argue  with  Mably,  from  a  negative  probability,  against  the 
indisputable  evidence  that  the  municipal  magistrates  of  some 
cities  were  in  being.  It  may  be  justly  doubted,  indeed, 
whether  they  possessed  a  considerable  authority.  Subject  to 
the  count,  as  the  great  depositary  of  royal  power,  the}-  would 
not  perhaps  beheld  worthy  of  receiving  immediate  commands 
from  the  sovereign  in  the  national  council.  Troja  speaks  with 
contempt  of  these  "  curias,"  whose  chief  business  was  to  regis- 
ter  testaments  and  witness  deeds  :  "  Son  sempre  i  medisimi 
ed  anche  derisorj  i  rieordi  delle  curie,  ridotte  alle  funzioni  di 
registrar  testamenti,  donazioni  e  contratti,  o  ad  elegger  mag- 
istrati  che  non  poteano  difendere  il  Romano  dalle  violenze  dei 
Franchi,  senza  l'intervenzione  de'  vescovi  di  sangue  Romano, 
o  di  sanorue  barbarico ;  ma  in  vano  si  cercherebbe  la  vita  e  la 
possanza  della  curia  Romana  in  questi  vani  simulacri." 
(Vol.  i.  part  v.  p.  133.)  They  might  be,  nevertheless,  quite 
as  important  as  under  the  later  emperors. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  conclude  that  every  city  in  which  the 
curia  or  the  defensor  subsisted  during  the  imperial  govern- 
ment retained  those  institutions  throughout  the  domination  of 
the  Franks.  It  appears  that  the  functions  of  "  defensor  civ- 
itatis,"  that  is  to  say,  the  protection  of  the  city  against  arbi- 
trary acts  of  the  provincial  governors,  and  the  exercise  of 
jurisdiction  within  its  boundaries,  frequently  devolved  upon 
the  bishop.  It  is  impossible  not  to  recognize  the  efficacy  of 
episcopal  government  in  sustaining  municipal  rights  during 
the  first  dynasty.  The  bishops  were  a  link,  or  rather  a 
shield,  between  the  barbarians  who  respected  them  and  the 
people  whom  they  protected,  and  to  whose  race  they  for  a 
long  time  commonly  belonged.  But  the  bishop  was  legally, 
and  sometimes  actually,  elected,  as  the  defensor  had  been,  by 
the  people  at  large.  This,  indeed,  ceased  to  be  the  case  be- 
fore the  reign  of  Charlemagne ;  and  the  crown,  or  (in  the 
progress  of  the  feudal  system)  its  chief  vassals,  usurped  the 
power  of  nomination,  though  the  formality  of  election  was 
not  abolished.  Certain  it  is  that  from  this  analogy  to  the  de- 
fensor, and  from  the  still  closer  analogy  to  the  feudal  vassal, 
after  royal  grants  of  jurisdiction  and  immunity  became  usual, 
not  less  than  by  the  respect  due  to  his  station,  the  bishop 


334  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.  Notes  i, 

became  as  much  the  civil  governor  of  his  city  as  the  counl 
was  of  the  rural  district. 

This  was  a  great  revolution  in  the  internal  history  of  cit- 
ies and  one  which  generally  led  to  the  discontinuance  of  their 
popular  institutions;  so  that  after  the  reign  of  Charlemagne, 
if  not  earlier,  we  may  perhaps  consider  a  municipality  choos- 
ing its  own  officers  as  an  exception,  though  not  a  very  unfre- 
quent  one,  to  the  general  usage.  But  instances  of  this  are 
more  commonly  found  to  the  south  of  the  Loire,  where  Ro- 
man laws  prevailed  and  the  feudal  spirit  was  less  vigorous 
than  in  the  northern  provinces.  Thus  Raynouard  has  de- 
duced the  municipal  government  of  ten  cities  from  the  fifth 
to  the  twelfth  century.  Seven  of  these  are  of  the  south  — 
Perigueux,  Bourges,  Aries,  Nismes,  Marseilles,  Toulouse, 
and  Narbonne ;  three  only  of  the  north  —  Paris,  Rheims, 
and  Metz.  (Vol.  ii.  p.  177.)  It  seems,  however,  more  than 
probable  that  these  were  not  the  whole  ;  even  in  the  north 
Meaux  and  Chalons  might  be  added,  and,  what  in  early 
times  wras  undoubtedly  to  be  reckoned  a  Frank  city,  Cologne 
The  corporate  character  of  many  of  these  is 'displayed  by 
their  coins.  "  Civitas  Massiliensis,"  or  "  Narbonensis,"  will  be 
found  on  the  reverse  of  pieces  bearing  the  heads  of  the 
French  kings  of  the  three  dynasties,  especially  under  Louis 
the  Debonair  and  Charles  the  Bald  (p.  152).  But  it  seems 
to  me  that  the  evidence  of  a  popular  assembly  or  curia,  even 
in  Rheims,  which  has  always  been  wont  to  boast  peculiarly 
of  the  antiquity  of  her  privileges,  is  weak  comparatively  with 
what  M.  Raynouard  has  alleged  for-  the  cities  of  Provence. 
As  to  Paris,  it  is  absolutely  none  at  all.  This  assembly  ap- 
pears to  have  hardly  survived  in  the  north  of  France,  and  to 
have  been  replaced  by  scabini.  These  were  originally  chos- 
en by  the  citizens,  but  gradually  on  the  bishop's  nomination. 
Those  of  Rheims  appear  in  847,  exercising  their  functions 
under  an  officer  of  the  archbishop.  (Archives  Administra- 
tifs  de  la  Ville  de  Rheims,  Preface,  p.  7,  in  Documens  Inedits 
1839.  The  editor,  however  (M.  Varin),  inclines  to  adopt  the 
theory  of  a  Roman  origin  for  the  privileges  of  that  city.  The 
citizens  called  themselves  in  991,  addressing  the  archbishop 
"cives  tui;"  whence  M.  Varin  infers  that  they  took  an  oath 
of  allegiance  to  that  prelate,  and  that  their  claims  to  a  pre- 
scriptive independence  must  be  given  up.  (Vol.  i.  p.  150.) 
Such  independence,  (that  is,  of  all  but  the  sovereign)  can  at 


Crap.  II.  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.  335 

most  only  be  admitted  as  to  the  great  eities  of  Provence  and 
Languedoc,  which  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  en- 
tered into  treaties  with  foreign  powers,  and  conducted  them- 
selves as  independent  republics,  though  perhaps  under  the 
nominal  superiority  of  the  counts.  Emulous,  as  it  appears, 
of  Italian  liberty,  they  adopted  the  government  by  consuls 
elected  by  the  community.  And  this  honorable  title  was 
given  to  the  chief  magistrates  in  most  cities  south  of  the 
Loire,  though  a  different  system,  as  we  shall  see,  prevailed 
on  the  other  bank. 

The  Benedictine  historians  of  Languedoc  are  of  opinion 
that  the  city  of  Nismes  had  municipal  magistrates  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  tenth  century  (t.  ii.  p.  111).  The  burgesses  of 
Carcassonne  appear  by  name  in  a  charter  of  1107  (p.  515). 
In  one  of  1131  the  consuls  of  Beziers  are  mentioned  ;  they 
existed  therefore  previously  (p.  409,  and  Appendix,  p.  959). 
The  magistrates  of  St.  Antonin  en  Rouergue  are  named  in 
1136;  those  of  Montpellier  in  1142;  of  Narbonne  in  1148; 
and  of  St.  Gilles  in  1149  (p.  515,  432,  442,  464).  The 
capitouls  of  Toulouse  pretend  to  an  extravagant  antiquity : 
but  were  in  fact  established  by  Alfonso  count  of  Toulouse, 
who  died  in  1148.  In  1152  Raymond  V.  confirmed  the  reg- 
ulations made  by  the  common  council  of  Toulouse,  which  be- 
came the  foundation  of  the  customs  of  that  city.    (p.  472). 

If  we  may  trust  altogether  to  the  Assises  de  Jerusalem  in 
their  present  shape,  the  court  of  burgesses,  having  jurisdic- 
tion over  persons  of  that  rank,  was  instituted  by  Godfrey  of 
Bouillon,  who  died  in  1100.  (Ass.  de  Jerus.  c.  2.)  This 
would  be  even  earlier  than  the  charter  of  London,  granted 
by  Henry  I.  Lord  Lyttelton  goes  so  far  as  to  call  it  "  cer- 
tain that  in  England  many  cities  and  towns  were  bodies  cor- 
porate and  communities  long  before  the  alteration  introduced 
into  France  by  the  charters  of  Louis  le  Gros."  (Hist,  of 
Henry  H.  vol.  iv.  p.  29.)  But  this  position,  as  I  shall  more 
particularly  show  in  another  place,  is  not  borne  out  by 
any  good  authority,  if  it  extends  to  any  internal  jurisdiction 
and  management  of  their  own  police ;  whereof,  except  in  the 
instance  of  London,  we  have  no  proof  before  the  reign  of 
Henry  II. 

The  legal  incorporation  of  communities  was  perhaps  ear- 
lier in  Spain  than  in  any  other  country.  Alfonso  V.  in  1020 
granted  a  charter  to  Leon,  which  is  said  to  mention  the  com- 


336  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT-  Notes  to 

mon  council  of  that  city  in  terms  that  show  it  to  be  an  estab- 
lished institution.  During  the  latter  part  of  the  eleventh 
century,  as  well  as  in  subsequent  times,  such  charters  are 
very  frequent.  (Marina,  Ensayo  Historico-Critico  sobre  las 
sieta  pallidas.)  In  several  instances  we  find  concessions  of 
smaller  privileges  to  towns,  without  any  political  power. 
Thus  Berenger,  count  of  Barcelona,  in  102")  confirms  to  the 
inhabitants  of  that  city  all  the  franchises  which  they  already 
possess.  These  seem,  however,  to  be  confined  to  exemption 
from  paying  rent  and  from  any  jurisdiction  below  that  of  an 
officer  deputed  by.  the  count.  (De  Marca,  Marca  Hispanica, 
p.  1038.)  Another  grant  occurs  in  the  same  volume  (p. 
909),  from  the  bishop  of  Barcelona  in  favor  of  a  town  of  his 
diocese.  By  some  inattention  Robertson  has  quoted  these 
charters  as  granted  to  "  two  villages  in  the  county  of  Rousil- 
Ion."  (Hist.  Charles  V.  note  16.)  The  charters  of  Tortosa 
and  Lerida  in  1149  do  not  contain  any  grant  of  jurisdiction 
(p.  1303). 

The  corporate  towns  in  France  and  England  always  en- 
joyed fuller  privileges  than  these  Catalonian  charters  impart 
The  essential  characteristics  of  a  commune,  according  to  M. 
Brequigny,  were  an  association  confirmed  by  charter ;  a  code 
of  fixed  sanctioned  customs  ;  and  a  set  of  privileges,  alway  - 
including  municipal  or  elective  government.  (Ordonnances, 
p.  3.)  A  distinction  ought,  however,  to  be  pointed  out, 
which  is  rather  liable  to  elude  observation,  between  com- 
munes, or  corporate  towns,  and  boroughs  (bourgeoisies).  The 
main  difference  was  that  in  the  latter  there  was  no  elective 
government,  the  magistrates  being  appointed  by  the  king  or 
other  superior.  In  the  possession  of  fixed  privileges  and  ex- 
emptions, in  the  personal  liberty  of  their  inhabitants,  and  in 
the  certainty  of  their  legal  usages,  there  was  no  distinction 
between  corporate  towns  and  mere  boroughs  :  and  indeed  it  is 
agreed  that  every  corporate  town  was  a  borough,  though  ev- 
ery borough  was  not  a  corporation.1  The  French  antiquary 
quoted  above  does  not  trace  these  inferior  communities  or 
borousrhs  higher  than  the  charters  of  Louis  VI.  But  we 
find  the  name  and  a  good  deal  of  the  substance,  in  England 

1  The  preface  to  the  twelfth  volume  of  it,  however,  is  applicable  to  both  spe- 

of  Ordonnances  des  Kois  contains  a  full  cies,   or  rather  to  the  genus  and    the 

account  of  bourgeoisies,  as  that  to  the  species.     See,  too,  that  to  the  fourteenth 

eleventh  does  of  communes.    A  great  part  volume  of  Recueil  des  Historienj,  p.  74. 


Jhap.  n  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.  337 

under  William  the  Conqueror,  as  is   manifest  from  Domes- 
day-Book. 

It  is  evident  that  if  extensive  privileges  of  internal  gov- 
ernment had  been  preserved  in  the  north  of  France,  there 
could  have  been  no  need  for  that  great  movement  towards 
the    close  of  the   eleventh   century,   which   ended   in   estab- 
lishing civic  freedom  ;  much  less  could  the  contemporary  histo- 
rians have  spoken  of  this  as  a  new  era  in  the  state  of  France 
The  bishops  were  now  almost  sovereign  in  their  cities ;  the 
episcopal,   the  municipal,  the  feudal  titles,   conspired   to  en- 
hance their  power  ;  and  from  being  the  protectors  of  the  peo- 
ple, from  the  glorious  office  of  defensores  civitatis,  they  had, 
in  many  places  at  least,  become  odious  by  their  own  exac- 
tions.    Hence  the  citizens  of  Cambray  first  revolted  against 
their  bishop  in  957,  and,  after  several  ineffectual  risings,  ulti- 
mately constituted  themselves  into  a  community  in  1076.    The 
citizens  of  Mans,  about  the  latter  time,  had  the   courage  to 
resist  William  Duke   of  Normandy ;    but  tins  generous  at- 
tempt  at  freedom    was   premature.     The   cities  of  Noyon, 
Beauvais,  and  St.  Quentin,  about  the  beginning  of  the  next 
century,  were   successful  in  obtaining   charters  of  immunity 
and  self-government  from   their   bishops ;  and  where   these 
were  violated,  on  one  side  or  the  other,  the  king,  Louis  VI., 
came  in  to  redress  the  injured  party  or  to  compose  the  dis- 
sensions of  both.     Hence  arose  the  royal  charters  of  the 
Picard  cities,  which  soon  extended  to  other  parts  of  France, 
and  were  used  as   examples  by  the  vassals  of  the  crown. 
This  subject,  and  especially  the  struggles  of  the  cities  against 
the  bishops  before  the  legal  establishment  of  communities  by 
charter,  is  abundantly  discussed  by  M.  Thierry,  in  his  Let- 
tres  sur  l'Histoire  de  France.     But  even  where  charters  are 
extant,  they  do  not  always  create  an  incorporated  community, 
but,  as  at  Laon,  recognize  and  regulate  an  internal   society 
already  established.     (Guizot,  Civilisation  en  France,  Lecon 
47.) 

We  must  here  distinguish  the  cities  of  Flanders  and  Hol- 
land, which  obtained  their  independence  much  earlier ;  in 
fact,  their  self-government  goes  back  beyond  any  assignable 
date.  (Sismondi,  iv.  432.)  They  appear  to  have  sprung 
from  a  distinct  source,  but  still  from  the  great  reservoir  of 
Roman  institutions.  The  cities  on  the  Rhine  retained  more 
of  their  ancient  organization  than  we  find  in  northern  France, 

vol.  i  —  m.  22 


338  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  Noxaa  re 

The  Roman  language,  says  Thierry,  had  here  perished ; 
the  institutions  survived.  At  Cologne  we  find  from  age  to 
age  a  corporation  of  citizens  exactly  resembling  the  curia> 
and  whose  members  set  up  hereditary  pretensions  to  a  Ro- 
man descent ;  we  find  there  a  particular  tribunal  for  the 
"  cessio  bonorum,"  a  part  of  Roman  law  unknown  to  the  old 
jurisprudence  of  Germany  as  much  as  to  that  of  the  feudal 
system.  In  the  twelfth  century  the  free  constitution  of 
Cologne  passed  for  ancient.  From  Cologne  and  Treves  mu 
incipal  rights  spread  to  the  Rhenish  cities  of  less  remote 
origin,  and  reached  the  great  communities  of  Flanders  and 
Brabant.  Thierry  has  quoted  a  remarkable  passage  from 
the  life  of  the  empress  St.  Adelaide,  who  died  in  999,  whence 
we  may  infer  the  continuance,  at  least  in  common  estimation, 
of  Roman  privileges  in  the  Rhenish  cities.  "  Ante  duodeci- 
mum  circiter  annum  obitus  sui,  in  loco  qui  dicker  Salsa 
(Seltz  in  Alsace),  urbem  decrevit  fieri  sub  libertate  Romana, 
quern  affectum  postea  ad  perfectum  perducit  effectum." 
(Recitsdes  T.  M.  i.  274.) 

But  the  acuteness  of  this  writer  has  discovered  a  wholly 
different  origin  for  the  communes  in  the  north  of  France. 
He  deduces  them  from  the  old  Teutonic  institution  of  guilds, 
or  fraternities  by  voluntary  compact,  to  relieve  each  other  in 
poverty,  or  to  protect  each  other  from  injury.  Two  essential 
characteristics  belonged  to  them ;  the  common  banquet  and 
the  common  purse.  They  had  also  in  many  instances  a  relig- 
ious, sometimes  a  secret,  ceremonial  to  knit  more  firmly  the 
bond  of  fidelity.  They  became,  as  usual,  suspicious  to  gov- 
ernments, as  several  capitularies  of  Charlemagne  prove. 
But  they  spoke  both  to  the  heart  and  to  the  reason  in  a  voice 
which  no  government  could  silence.  They  readily  became 
connected  with  the  exercise  of  trades,  with  the  training  of 
apprentices,  with  the  traditional  rules  of  art.  We  find  them 
in  all  Teutonic  and  Scandinavian  countries  ;  they  are  fre- 
quently mentioned  in  our  Anglo-Saxon  documents,  and  are 
the  basis  of  those  corporations  which  the  Norman  kings  rec- 
ognized or  founded.  The  guild  was,  of  course,  in  its  prima- 
ry character  a  personal  association  ;  it  was  in  the  state,  but 
not  the  state ;  it  belonged  to  the  city  without  embracing  all 
the  citizens ;  its  purposes  were  the  good  of  the  fellows  alone. 
But  when  their  good  was  inseparable  from  that  of  their  little 
country,  their  walls  and  churches,  the  principle  of  voluntary 


Cuap   II.  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  339 

association  was  readily  extended;  and  from  the  private 
guild,  possessing  already  the  vital  spirit  of  faithfulness  and 
brotherly  love,  sprung  the  sworn  community,  the  body  of 
citizens,  bound  by  a  voluntary  but  perpttual  obligation  to 
guard  each  other's  rights  against  the  thefts  of  the  weak  or 
the  tyranny  of  the  powerful. 

The  most  remarkable  proof  of  this  progress  from  a  mer- 
chant guild  to  a  corporation  is  exhibited  in  the  local  history 
of  Paris.  No  mention  of  a  curia  or  Roman  municipality  in 
that  city  has  been  traced  in  any  record :  we  are  driven  to 
Raynouard's  argument  —  Could  Paris  be  destitute  of  insti- 
tutions which  had  become  the  right  of  all  other  cities  in 
Gaul  ?  A  couple  of  lines,  however,  from  the  poem  of  Guli- 
ehnus  Brito,  under  Philip  Augustus,  are  his  only  proof  (vol. 
ii.  p.  219).  But  at  Paris  there  was  a  great  college  or  cor- 
poration of  nautce  or  marchands  d'eau  ;  that  is,  who  supplied 
the  town  with  commodities  by  the  navigation  of  the  Seine.1 
These,  indeed,  do  not  seem  to  be  traced  very  far  back,  but 
the  necessary  documents  may  be  deficient.  They  appear 
abundantly  in  the  twelfth  century,  with  a  provost  and  scabini 
of  their  own.  And  to  this  body  the  kings  in  that  age  con- 
ceded certain  rights  over  the  inhabitants.  The  arms  borne 
by  the  city,  a  ship,  are  those  of  the  college  of  nautce.  The 
subsequent  process  by  which  this  corporation  slid  into  a  mu- 
nicipality is  not  clearly  developed  by  the  writer  to  whom  I 
must  refer. 

Thus  there  were  several  sources  of  the  municipal  institu- 
tions in  France  ;  first,  the  Roman  system  of  decurions,  handed 
down  prescriptively  in  some  cities,  but  chiefly  in  the  south ; 
secondly,  the  German  system  of  voluntary  societies  or  guilds, 
spreading  to  the  whole  community  for  a  common  end ;  thirdly, 
the  forcible  insurrection  of  the  inhabitants  against  their  lords 
or  prelates ;  and  lastly,  the  charters,  regularly  granted  by 
the  king  or  by  their  immediate  superior.  Few  are  like- 
ly now  to  maintain  the  old  theory  of  Robertson,  that  the 
kings  of  France  encouraged  the  communities,  in  order  tc 
make  head  with  their  help  against  the  nobility,  which  a  closer 
attention  to  history  refutes.  We  must  here,  however,  dis- 
tinguish the  corporate  towns  or  communities  from  the  other 

v  If  an  inscription  quoted  by  the  edi-  institution  under  Tiberius.  But  thU 
tOMOi'DuCange,  voc.  Nautae,  be  genuine,  must  prima  facie  be  suspicious  in  n« 
the  Nautae  I'arisiaci  existed  as  a  corporate    tritiing  degree. 


840  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  Notes  to 

class,  called  burgages,  bourgeoisies.  The  chattlaina  en- 
couraged the  growth  of  villages  around  their  castles,  from 
whom  they  often  derived  assistance  in  war,  and  conceded  to 
these  burgesses  some  privileges,  though  not  any  municipal 
independence. 

Guizot  observes,  as  a  difference  between  the  curial  system 
of  the  empire  and  that  of  the  French  communes  in  the 
twelfth  century,  that  the  former  was  aristocratic  in  its  spirit ; 
the  decurions  tilled  up  vacancies  in  their  body,  and  ultimate- 
ly their  privileges  became  hereditary.  But  the  latter  were 
grounded  on  popular  election,  though  with  certain  modi 
fications  as  to  eligibility.  Yet  some  of  the  aristocratic  ele- 
ments continued  among  the  communes  of  the  south.  (Lecon 
48.) 

It  is  to  be  confessed  that  while  the  kings,  from  the  end  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  altered  so  much  their  former  policy  as 
to  restrain,  in  great  measure,  and  even  in  some  instances  to 
overthrow,  the  liberties  of  French  cities,  there  was  too  much 
pretext  for  this  in  their  lawless  spirit  and  proneness  to  injus- 
tice. The  better  class,  dreading  the  populace,  gave  aid  to 
:he  royal  authority,  by  admitting  bailiffs  and  provosts  of  the 
arown  to  exercise  jurisdiction  within  their  walls.  But  by  this 
the  privileges  of  the  city  were  gradually  subverted.  (Guizot, 
Lecon  49  ;  Thierry,  Lettre  xiv.)  The  ancient  registers  of 
the  parliament  of  Paris,  called  Olim,  prove  this  continual 
interference  of  the  crown  to  establish  peace  and  order  in 
towns,  and  to  check  their  encroachment  on  the  rights  of  others. 
"  Nulle  part,"  says  M.  Beugnot,  u  on  ne  voit  aussi  bien  que 
les  communes  etaient  un  instrument  puissant  pour  operer 
dans  l'etat  de  grands  et  d'heureux  changemens,  mais  non  une 
institution  qui  eut  en  elle-meme  des  conditions  de  duree." 
(Registres  des  Arrets,  vol.  i.  p.  192,  in  Documens  IntSdits, 
1839.) 

A  more  favorable  period  for  civic  liberty  commenced  and 
possibly  terminated  with  the  most  tyrannical  of  French 
kings,  Louis  XI.  Though  the  spirit  of  rebellion,  which 
actuated  a  large  part  of  the  nobles  in  his  reign,  was  not 
strictly  feudal,  but  sprung  much  more  from  the  combination 
of  a  few  princes,  it  equally  put  the  crown  in  jeopardy,  and 
required  all  his  sagacity  to  withstand  its  encroachments.  He 
encouraged,  therefore,  with  a  policy  unusual  in  the  house  of 
VaJois,  the  Tiers  Etat,  the  middle  orders,  as  a  counterpoise 


Chap.  II.  MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT.  34) 

What' has  erroneously  been  said  of  Louis  VI.  is  true  oi  his 
subtle  descendant.  "  His  ordinances,"  it  is  remarked  by 
Sismondi  (xiv.  314),  "are  distinguished  by  liberal  views  iu 
government.  He  not  only  gave  the  citizens,  in  several  places, 
the  choice  of  their  magistrates,  but  established  an  urban 
militia,  training  the  inhabitants  to  the  use  of  arms,  and  plac- 
ing in  their  hands  the  appointment  of  officers."  And  thus, 
at  the  close  of  our  mediaeval  period,  we  leave  the  municipal 
authority  of  France  in  no  slight  vigor.  It  may  only  be  added 
that,  for  miscellaneous  information  as  to  the  French  com- 
munes, the  reader  should  have  recourse  to  that  great  reposi- 
tory of  curious  knowledge,  the  "  Histoire  des  Francais,  par 
Monteil,  Siecle  XV." 

The  continuance  of  Italian  municipalities  has  been  more 
disputed  of  late  than  that  of  the  French,  which  both  Savigny 
and  Raynouard  have  placed  beyond  question.  The  former 
of  these  writers  maintains  that  not  only  under  the  Ostrogoths 
and  Greeks  (the  latter  indeed  might  naturally  be  expected) 
we  have  abundant  testimony  to  the  ordo  decurionum  and 
other  Roman  institutions  in  the  Italian  cities,  but  that,  even 
under  the  Lombard  dominion,  the  same  privileges  were  un- 
impaired, or  at  least  not  subverted.  This  is  naturally  con- 
nected with  the  general  question  as  to  the  condition  of  the 
natives  in  that  period  ;  those  who  deny  them  any  rights  of 
citizenship,  or  even  protection  by  the  law,  will  not  be  inclined 
to  favor  the  supposition  of  an  internal  jurisdiction.  Troja 
accordingly,  following  older  writers,  rejects  the  notion  of  civic 
government  in  those  cities  which  endured  the  Lombard  yoke, 
and  elaborately  refutes  the  proofs  alleged  by  Savigny.  In 
this,  however,  he  does  not  seem  always  successful ;  but  the 
early  records  of  Italian  communities  are  by  no  means  so  de- 
cisive as  those  that  we  have  found  in  France. 

Liutprand,  as  Troja  conceives,  established  communities  of 
Lombards  alone.  But  he  suggests  that  even  before  the  reign 
of  Liutprand  there  may  have  been  such  a  district  government 
as  we  find  mentioned  by  Tacitus  among  the  Germans ;  aud 
this  might  possibly  be  denominated  by  the  Lombards  curia 
or  ordo,  in  imitation  of  the  Roman  names.  If,  therefore,  we 
meet  with  these  terms  in  the  laws  or  records  of  Italy  before 
Charlemagne,  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  not  relate 
to  Lombards  (p.  125).     This  is  hardly,  perhaps,  a  eonjecture 


342  MUNICIPAL   GOVERNMENT.    Notes  to  Chap    II 

that  will  be  favored.  Charlemagne,  however,  when  he  in- 
troduced the  distinction  of  personal  law,  constituted  in  every 
city  a  new  Lombard  community,  taking  its  name  from  the 
most  numerous  people,  but  in  which  each  nation  ihose  its 
own  scabini  or  judges  (p.  295). 


fTAI/l 


STATE  OF   ITALY.  343 


CHAPTER   III. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  ITALY,  FROM  THE  EXTINCTION  OF  THE 
CARLOVINGIAN  EMPERORS  TO  THE  INVASION  OF  NAPLES 
BY  CHARLES  VIII. 


PART   I. 


State  of  Italy  after  the  Death  of  Charles  the  Fat  —  Coronation  of  Otho  the  Great  ■ 
State  of  Rome  — Conrad  II.  — Union  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  with  the  Empire  — 
Establishment  of  the  Normans  in  Naples  and  Sicily  — Roger  Guiscard  —  Rise  of 
the  Lombard  Cities  —  They  gradually  become  more  independent  of  the  Empire  — 
Their  internal  Wars  —  Frederic  Barbarossa  —  Destruction  of  Milan  —  Lombard 
League— Battle  of  Legnano  —  Peace  of  Constance  —  Temporal  Principality  of  the 
Popes  —  Guelf  and  Ghibeliu  Factions  — Otho  IV.  —  Frederic  II. —Arrangement 
of  the  Italian  Republics  —  Second  Lombard  War  —  Extinction  of  the  House  of 
Swabia  —  Causes  of  the  Success  of  Lombard  Republics  —  Their  Prosperity  —  and 
Forms  of  Government  — Contentions  between  the  Nobility  and  People  — Civi] 
Wars  —  Story  of  Giovanni  di  Vicenza.i 

At  the  death  of    Charles  the   Fat  in  888,  that  part  of 
Italy  which  acknowledged  the   supremacy  of  the  state  of 
Western    empire    was    divided,    like    France    and  *jjjy  J'^* 
Germany,  among  a  few  powerful  vassals,  heredi-  ninth 
tary  governors   of   provinces.     The    principal   of  century> 

l  The  authorities  upon  which  this  him  to  annex  an  imaginary  importance 
chapter  is  founded,  and  which  do  not  to  the  dates  of  diplomas  and  other  incon- 
always  appear  at  the  foot  of  the  page,  siderable  matters  His  narrative  presents 
are  chiefly  the  following.  1.  Muratori's  a  mere  skeleton  devoid  of  juices ;  and 
Annals  of  Italy  (twelve  volumes  in  4to.  besides  its  intolerable  aridity,  it  labors 
or  eighteen  in  8vo.)  comprehend  a  sum-  under  that  confusion  which  a  merely 
mary  of  its  history  from  the  beginning  of  chronological  arrangement  of  concurrent 
the  Christian  era' to  the  peace  of  Aix  la  and  independent  events  must  always  pro- 
Chapelle.  The  volumes  relating  to  the  duce.  2.  The  Dissertations  on  Italian 
middle  ages,  into  which  he  has  digested  Antiquities,  by  the  same  writer,  may  be 
the  original  writers  contained  in  his  considered  either  as  one  or  two  workj. 
great  collection,  Scriptores  Reran)  Itali-  In  Latin  they  form  six  volumes  in  folio, 
carum,  are  by  much  the  best;  and  of  enriched  with  a  great  number  of  original 
these,  the  part  which  extends  from  the  documents.  In  Italian  they  are  freely 
seventh  or  eighth  to  the  end  of  the  translated  by  Muratori  himself,  abridged 
twelfth  century  is  the  fullest  and  most  no  doubt,  and  without  most  of  the  orig- 
useful.  Muratori's  accuracy  is  in  gen-  inal  instruments,  but  well  furnished  with 
eral  almost  implicitly  to  be  trusted,  and  quotations,  and  abundantly  sufficient  for 
his  plain  integrity  speaks  in  all  his  writ  ■  most  purposes.  They  form  three  toI- 
ings;  but  his  mind  was  not  philosopjiicai  umes  in  quarto.  I  have  in  general 
enough  to  discriminate  the  wheat  from  quoted  only  the  number  of  the  disserta- 
te chaff,  and  his  habits  of  life  induced  tion,  on  account  of  the  variance  between 


344. 


STATE  OF   ITALY. 


Chat.  111.  Part  I 


these  were  the  dukes  of  Spoleto  and  Tuscany,  the  marquises  of 
Jvrea,  Susa,  and  Friuli.  The  great  Lombard  duchy  of  Bene- 
vento,  which  had  stood  against  th<'  arms  of  Charlemagne,  and 
comprised  more  than  half  the  present  kingdom  of  Naples, 
had  now  fallen  into  decay,  and  was  straitened  by  the  Greeks 
in  Apulia,  and  by  the  principalities  of  Capua  and  Salerno, 
which  had  been  severed  from  its  own  territory,  on  the  oppo- 
andinthe  s**e  '?oast'1  Though  princes  of  the  Carlovingian 
erstpartof  line  continued  to  reign  in  France,  their  character 
was  too  little  distinguished  to  challenge  the  obedi- 
ence  of  Italy,  already  separated  by  family  partitions  from  the 
Transalpine   nations  ;  and  the  only  contest  was   among  her 


the  Latiu  and  Italian  works :  in  cases 
where  the  page  is  referred  to,  I  have  in- 
dicated by  the  title  which  of  the  two  I 
Intend  to  vouch.  3.  St.  Marc,  a  learned 
and  laborious  Frenchman,  has  written  a 
chronological  abridgment  of  Italian  his- 
tory, somewhat  in  the  manner  of  He- 
nault,  but  so  strangely  divided  by  several 
parallel  columns  in  every  page,  that  I 
could  hardly  name  a  book  more  incon- 
venient to  the  reader.  His  knowledge, 
like  Muratori;s,  lay  a  good  deal  in  points 
of  minute  inquiry ;  and  he  is  chiefly  to 
be  valued  in  ecclesiastical  history.  The 
work  descends  only  to  the  thirteenth 
century.  4.  Denina's  Rivoluzioni  d'lta 
lia,  originally  published  in  1769.  is  a 
perspicuous  and  lively  book,  in  which  the 
principal  circumstances  are  well  selected. 
It  is  not  perhaps  free  from  errors  in  fact, 
and  still  less  from  those  of  opinion  :  but, 
till  lately,  I  do  not  know  from  what 
source  a  general  acquaintance  with  the 
history  of  Ttalv  could  have  been  so  easily 
derived.  5.  The  publication  of  M.  Sis- 
mondi's  Histoire  des  Republiques  Itali- 
ennes  has  thrown  a  blaze  of  light  around 
the  most  interesting,  at  least  in  many 
respects,  of  European  countries  during 
the  middle  ages.  I  am  happy  to  bear 
witness,  so  far  as  my  own  studies  have 
enabled  me,  to  the  learning  and  diligence 
of  this  writer;  qualities  which  the  world 
is  sometimes  apt  not  to  suppose,  where 
they   perceive   so  much   eloquence   and 

{>hilosophy.  I  cannot  express  my  opin- 
on  of  M.  Sismondi  in  this  respect  more 
strongly  than  by  saying  that  his  work 
has  aimost  superseded  the  Annals  of 
Muratori ;  I  mean  from  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, before  which  period  his  labor  hardly 
begins.  Though  doubtless  not  more  ac- 
curate than  Muratori.  he  has  consulted 
•■  much  more  extensive  list  of  authors; 
and,  considered  as  a  register  of  facts 
alone,  his  history  is  incomparably  more 
useful.    These  are  combined  in  so  skilful 


a  manner  as  to  diminish,  in  a  great  de- 
gree, that  inevitable  confusion  which 
arises  from  frequency  of  transition  and 
want  of  general  unity.  It  is  much  to  be 
regretted  that,  from  too  redundant  de- 
tails of  unnecessary  circumstances,  and 
sometimes,  if  I  may  take  the  liberty  of 
saying  so,  from  unnecessary  reflections, 
M.  Sismondi  has  run  into  a  prolixity 
which  will  probably  iutimidate  the  lan- 
guid students  of  our  age.  It  is  the  mow 
to  be  regretted,  because  the  Ilistory  of 
Italian  Republics  is  calculated  to  pro- 
duce a  good  far  more  important  than 
storing  the  memory  with  historical  facts, 
that  of  communicating  to  the  reader's 
bosom  some  sparks  of  the  dignified  phi- 
losophy, the  love  for  truth  and  virtue. 
which  lives  along  its  eloquent  pages. 
6.  To  Muratori "s  collection  of  original 
writers  the  Scriptores  Rerum  Italica- 
rum,  in  twenty-four  volumes  in  folio.  I 
have  paid  considerable  attention  ;  perhaps 
there  is  no  volume  of  it  which  I  have  not 
more  or  less  consulted.  But,  after  the 
Annals  of  the  same  writer,  and  the  work 
of  M.  Sismondi,  I  have  not  thought  my 
self  bound  to  repeat  a  laborious  search 
into  all  the  authorities  upon  which  those 
writers  depend.  The  utility,  for  the 
most  part,  of  perusing  original  and  con- 
temporary authors,  consist*  less  in  ascer- 
taining mere  facts  than  in  acquiring  that 
insight  into  the  spirit  and  temper  of  their 
times  which  it  is  utterly  impracticable 
for  any  compiler  to  impart.  It  would  b« 
impossible  for  me  to  distinguish  what 
information  I  have  derived  from  thesa 
higher  sources;  in  cases,  therefore,  where 
no  particular  authority  is  named.  I  would 
refer  to  the  writings  of  Muratori  aud  Sis- 
mondi. especially  the  latter,  as  the  sub- 
stratum of  the  following  chapter. 

1  Giannone,  Istoria  Civile  di  Napoli, 
1.  vii. ;  Sismondi,  Hist,  des  Republique/ 
Italiennes,  t.  i.  p.  244. 


Italy.  OTHO   THE  GREAT.  345 

native  chiefs.  One  of  these,  Berenger,  originally  marquis  of 
Friuli,  or  the  March  of  Treviso,  reigned  for  thirty-six  years, 
but  with  continually  disputed  pretensions ;  and  after  his  death 
the  calamities  of  Italy  were  sometimes  aggravated  by  tyran- 
ny, and  sometimes  by  intestine  war.1  The  Hungarians  deso- 
lated Lombardy ;  the  southern  coasts  were  infested  by  the 
Saracens,  now  masters  of  Sicily.  Plunged  in  an  abyss,  from 
which  she  saw  no  other  means  of  extricating  herself,  Italy 
lost  sight  of  her  favorite  independence,  and  called  in  the  as- 
sistance of  Otho  the  First,  king  of  Germany.  Little  oppo- 
sition was  made  to  this  powerful  monarch.  Berenger  II.,  the 
reigning  sovereign  of  Italy,  submitted  to  hold  the  kingdom  of 
him  as  a  fief.2     But  some  years  afterwards,  new  rtM.   .. 

t  i  ••  r\  i  -i  it     r.  ,       Otho  the 

disturbances    arising,    Otho     descended   from    the  Great. 
Alps   a   second   time,  deposed    Berenger,  and  re-  A'D' 951' 
ceived  at  the  hands  of  Pope  John  XII.  the  imperial  dignity, 
which  had  been  suspended  for  nearly  forty  years. 

Every  ancient  prejudice,  every  recollection,  whether  of 
Augustus  or  of  Charlemagne,  had  led  the  Italians  to  annex 
the  notion  of  sovereignty  to  the  name  of  Roman  Emperor ; 
nor  were  Otho,  or  his  two  immediate  descendants,  by  any 
means  inclined  to  waive  these  supposed  prerogatives,  which 
they  were  well  able  to  enforce.  Most  of  the  Lombard 
princes  acquiesced  without  apparent  repugnance  in  the  new 
German  government,  which  was  conducted  by  Otho  the 
Great  with  much  prudence  and  vigor,  and  occasionally  with 
severity.  The  citizens  of  Lombardy  were  still  better  satis- 
fied with  a  change  that  ensured  a  more  tranquil  and  regular 
administration  than  they  had  experienced  under  the  preced- 
ing kings.  But  in  one,  and  that  the  chief  of  Italian  cities, 
very  different  sentiments  were  prevalent.  We  find,  indeed, 
a  considerable  obscurity  spread  over  the  internal  history  of 

i  Berenger,    being    grandson,    by     a  imperio  guardano  a  plu  vasto  scopo  ed  i 

daughter,  of  Louis  the  Debonair,  may  pontifici  Romano  sono  dalla  foiza   delle 

be  reckoned  of  the  Carlovingian  family,  cose  chiamati  a  tenereilfrenointellettualt 

He  was  a  Frank  by  law.  according  to  della  civita  de'  popoli  di  tutta  Europa." 

Troja,  who  denies  to  him  and  his  son,  Troja    deduces    the    Italian    commune* 

Berenger  II.,  the  name  of  Italians.    It  "  dopo  il  mille  "  from  a  German  rather 

was  Otho  I.  that  put  an  end  to  the  Frank  than  a  Roman  origin.     "La  sono  vera- 

dominion.     Storia  d'ltalia,  v.  357.  mente  i    comuni    dov'   e  la    spada   pet 

_  "Or  gia  tutto  all'  apparir  degli  Ottoni  difendergli;    ma  nel  regno  Lougobardic<! 

si  cangia   da  capo   in   Italia,    nel  mode  da  lunga  stagione  la  spada  piu  non  pen 

Btessoche  tutto  erasi  cangiato  alia  renuta  deva  dal  fianco  del  Romano  "  (p.  368). 
de' Franchi.     Le  citta  Longobarde  pren-        2  Muratori,   a.d.951;  Denina,   Rivoru 

dono  altra  faccia,  la  possanza  de'  vescori  zioni  d'ltalia,  1.  ix.  c.  6. 
b*  aumenta,  i  patti  fra  il  sacerdozio  e  1' 


346  INTERNAL   STATE  OF   ROME      Chat.  III.  Pabt  1 

internal         Rome  during  the  long  period  fiom  the  recovery 
state  of  of*  Italy  by  Belisarius  to  the  end  of  the  eleventh 

century.  The  popes  appear  to  have  possessed 
some  measure  of  temporal  power,  even  while  the  city  wad 
professedly  governed  by  the  exarchs  of  Ravenna,  in  the 
name  of  the  Eastern  empire.  This  power  became  more  ex- 
tensive after  her  separation  from  Constantinople.  It  was, 
however,  subordinate  to  the  undeniable  sovereignty  of  the 
new  imperial  family,  who  were  supposed  to  enter  upon  all  the 
rights  of  their  predecessors.  There  was  always  an  imperial 
officer,  or  prefect,  in  that  city,  to  render  criminal  jusl ice ;  an 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  emperor  was  taken  by  the  people ; 
and  upon  any  irregular  election  of  a  pope,  a  circumstance  by 
no  means  unusual,  the  emperors  held  themselves  entitled  to 
interpose.  But  the  spirit  and  even  the  institutions  of  the 
Romans  were  republican.  Amidst  the  darkness  of  the  tenth 
century,  which  no  contemporary  historian  dissipates,  we 
faintly  distinguish  the  awful  names  of  senate,  consuls,  and 
tribunes,  the  domestic  magistracy  of  Rome.  These  shadows 
of  past  glory  strike  us  at  first  with  surprise  ;  yet  there  is  no 
improbability  in  the  supposition  that  a  city  so  renowned  and 
populous,  and  so  happily  sheltered  from  the  usurpation  of  the 
Lombards,  might  have  preserved,  or  might  afterwards  es- 
tablish, a  kind  of  municipal  government,  which  it  would  be 
natural  to  dignify  with  those  august  titles  of  antiquity.1 
During  that  anarchy  which  ensued  upon  the  fall  of  the  Car- 
lovingian  dynasty,  the  Romans  acquired  an  independence 
which  they  did  not  deserve.  The  city  became  a  prey  to  the 
most  terrible  disorders  ;  the  papal  chair  was  sought  for  at 
best  by  bribery  or  controlling  influence,  often  by  violence  and 
assassination ;  it  was  filled  by  such  men  as  naturally  rise  by 
such  means,  whose  sway  was  precarious,  and  generally  ended 
either  in  their  murder  or  degradation.  For  many  years  the 
supreme  pontiffs  were  forced  upon  the  church  by  two  women 
of  high  rank  but  infamous  reputation,  Theodora  and  her 
daughter  Marozia.  The  kings  of  Italy,  whose  election  in  a 
diet  of  Lombard  princes  and  bishops  at  Roncaglia  was  not 
conceived  to  convey  any  pretensions  to  the  sovereignty  of 
Rome,  could  never  obtain  any  decided  influence  in  papal 
elections,  which  were  the  object  of  struggling  factions  among 
the  resident   nobility.     In   this  temper  of  the  Romans,  thei 

»  Muratori,  a.d.  967,  987,  1015,  1087  ;  Sismoudi,  t.  i.  p.  155. 


ITALY. 


HENRY   II.   AND  ARD01N.  347 


were  ill  disposed  to  resume  habits  of  obedience  to  a  foreign 
sovereign.  The  next  year  after  Otho's  corona-  ^ 
tion  they  rebelled,  the  pope  at  their  head;  but 
were  of  course  subdued  without  difficulty.  The  same  repub- 
lican spirit  broke  out  whenever  the  emperors  were  absent  in 
Germany,  especially  during  the  minority  of  Otho  III.,  and 
directed  itself  against  the  temporal  superiority  of  the  pope. 
But  when  that  emperor  attained  manhood  he  besieged  and 
took  the  city,  crushing  all  resistance  by  measures  of  severity ; 
and  especially  by  the  execution  of  the  consul  Crescentius,  a 
leader  of  the  popular  faction,  to  whose  instigation  the  tumul- 
tuous license  of  Rome  was  principally  ascribed.1 

At  the  death  of  Otho  III.  without  children,  in  1002,  che 
compact  between  Italy  and  the  emperors  of  the  Henry  n 
house  of  Saxony  was  determined.  Her  engage-  and  Ardbin- 
ment  of  fidelity  was  certainly  not  applicable  to  every  sover 
eign  whom  the  princes  of  Germany  might  raise  to  their 
throne.  Accordingly  Ardoin  marquis  of  Ivrea  was  elected 
king  of  Italy.  But  a  German  party  existed  among  the 
Lombard  princes  and  bishops,  to  which  his  insolent  demeanor 
soon  gave  a  pretext  for  inviting  Henry  II.,  the  new  king  of 
Germany,  collaterally  related  to  their  late  sovereign^  Ardoin 
was  deserted  by  most  of  the  Italians,  but  retained  his  former 
subjects  in  Piedmont,  and  disputed  the  crown  for  many  years 
with  Henry,  who  passed  very  little  time  in  Italy.  During 
this  period  there  was  hardly  any  recognized  government ; 
and  the  Lombards  became  more  and  more  accustomed, 
through  necessity,  to  protect  themselves,  and  to  provide  for 
their  own  internal  police.  Meanwhile  the  German  nation  had 
become  odious  to  the  Italians.  The  rude  soldiery,  insolent 
and  addicted  to  intoxication,  were  engaged  in  frequent  dis- 
putes with  the  citizens,  wherein  the  latter,  as  is  usual  in 
similar  cases,  were  exposed  first  to  the  summary  vengeance 
of  the  troops,  and  afterwards  to  penal  chastisement  for  sedi- 
tion.2 In  one  of  these  tumults,  at  the  entry  of  Henry  II.  in 
1004,  the  city  of  Pavia  was  burned  to  the  ground,  which  in- 
spired its  inhabitants  with  a  constant  animosity  against  that 
emperor.  Upon  his  death  in  1024,  the  Italians  were  dispos- 
ed to  break  once  more  their  connection  with  Germany,  which 

i  Sismondi,  t.  i.  p.  164,  makes  a  patriot  of  history,  without  vouching  for  the  <w 

hero  of  Crescentius.  But  we  know  so  curacy  of  its  representations. 
little  of  the  man  or  the  times,  that  it  -  Muratori,  a.d.  1027,  1037- 
seems  better  to  follow  the  common  tenor 


3 18  CONRAD  II.  Chap.  Ill   E'abt  L 

had  elected  as  sovereign  Conrad  duke  of  Franconia.     They 
offered  their  crown  to  Robert  king  of  France,  and  to  William 
duke  of  Guienne;  but  neither  of  them  was  imprudent  enough 
to  involve   himself   in   the  difficult  and   faithless  politics  of 
Italy.     It  may  surprise  us  that  no  candidate  appeared  from 
among  her  native  princes.     But  it  had  been  the  dexterous 
policy  of   the  Othos  to  weaken  the  great  Italian  fiefs,  which 
were  still  rather  considered  as  hereditary  governments  than 
as   absolute   patrimonies,   by  separating  districts   from   their 
jurisdiction,  under  inferior  marquises  and  rural  counts.1    The 
bishops  were  incapable  of   becoming  competitors,  and  gen- 
erally attached   to   the    German   party.     The  cities   already 
possessed  material  influence,  but   were  disunited  by  mutual 
Election  of     jealousies.      Since    ancient    prejudices,    therefore, 
Com-ad  ii.      precluded  a  federate  league  of  independent  princi- 
a.d.  1024.       parties  and  republics,  for  which  perhaps  the  actual 
condition  of  Italy  unfitted  her,  Eribert  archbishop  of  Milan, 
accompanied  by  some  other  chief  men  of  Lombard)',  repaired 
to  Constance,  and  tendered  the  crown  to  Conrad,  which  he  was 
already  disposed  to  claim  as  a  sort  of  dependency  upon  Ger- 
many.    It  does  not  appear  that  either  Conrad  or  his  succes- 
sors were  ever  regularly  elected  to  reign  over  Italy ; 2  but 
whether  this  ceremony  took  place  or  not,  we  may  certainly 
date  from  that  time  the  subjection  of  Italy  to  the  Germanic 
body.     It  became  an  unquestionable  maxim,  that  the  votes 
of  a  few  German  princes  conferred  a  right  to  the  sovereignty 
of  a  country  which  had  never  been  conquered,  and  which  had 
never  formally  recognized   this  superiority.3     But  it  was  an 
equally  fundamental  rule,  that  the  elected  king  of  Germany 
could  not  assume  the  title  of  Roman  Emperor  until  his  cor- 
onation by  the  pope.     The  middle  appellation  of  King  of  the 
Romans  was  invented  as  a  sort  of  approximation  to  the  im- 

i  Denina,  1.  ix.  c.  11;  Muratori,  Antiq.  Roinani  gloria  regni 

Ital.  Dissert.  8;  Armali  d'ltalia,  a.d.  989.  Nos  penes  est ;  quemcunque  sibi  Germa- 

-  Muratori,  a.d.  1026.     It  is  said  after-  nia  regem 

*ards,  p.  367,  that  he  was  a  Romanis  ad  Praeficit,   hunc    dives    submisso   vertioa 

Imperatorem    electus.      The   people    of  Roma                                            [Rhenus 

Rome  therefore  preserved  their  nominal  Aeripit,   et   verso   Tiberiui    regit   ordine 

right  of  concurring  in  the  election  of  an  Gunther.  Ligurinus  ap.  Struvium 

emperor.      Muratori,  in   another   place,  Corpus  Hist.  German,  p.  266. 

A.D.  1040,  supposes  that  Henry  III.  was  Yet  it  appears   from  Otho  of  Frisingen, 

chosen  king  of  Italy,  though   he  allows  an  unquestionable  authority,  that  some 

that  no   proof  of   it  exists  ;   and  there  Italian  nobles  concurred,  or  at  least  wew 

seems  no  reason  for  the  supposition.  present  and  assisting,  in  the  election  a* 

3  Gunther,   the  poet  of  Frederic   Bar-  Frederic  himself :  1.  ii.  c.  i. 
barossa,  expresses  this  not  inelegantly : 


fTAi/r  THE  NORMANS   AT  A  VERSA.  349 

perial  dignity.  But  it  was  not  till  the  reign  of  Maximilian 
that  the  actual  coronation  at  Rome  was  dispensed  with,  and 
the  title  of  emperor  taken  immediately  after  the  election. 

The  period  between  Conrad  of  Franconia  and  Frederic 
Barbarossa,  or  from  about  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  to  that 
of  the  twelfth  century,  is  marked  by  three  great  events  in 
Italian  history;  the  struggle  between  the  empire  and  the 
papacy  for  ecclesiastical  investitures,  the  establishment  of  the 
Norman  kingdom  in  Naples,  and  the  formation  of  distinct  and 
nearly  independent  republics  among  the  cities  of  Eombardy 
The  first  of  these  will  find  a  more  appropriate  place  in  a 
subsequent  chapter,  where  I  shall  trace  the  progress  of  eccle- 
siastical power.  But  it  produced  a  long  and  almost  incessant 
state  of  disturbance  in  Italy  ;  and  should  be  mentioned  at 
present  as  one  of  the  main  causes  which  excited  in  that 
country  a  systematic  opposition  to  the  imperial  authority. 

The  southern  provinces  of  Italy,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
eleventh  century,  were  chiefly  subject   to  the  Greek  empire, 
which  had  latterly  recovered  part  of  its  losses,  and  exhibited 
some  ambition  and  enterprise,  though  without  any 
intrinsic  vigor.      They  were  governed  by  a  lieu-  provinces 
tenant,  styled  Catapan,1  who  resided  at   Bari  in  5[as1yUthern 
Apulia.    On  the  Mediterranean  coast  three  duchies, 
or  rather  republics  of  Naples,  Gaeta,  and  Amalfi,   had  for 
several  ages  preserved  their  connection  with  the  Greek  em- 
pire, and  acknowledged  its  nominal  sovereignty.     The  Lom- 
bard  principalities   of    Benevento,   Salerno,  and    Capua  had 
much   declined  from   their  ancient   splendor.      The   Greeks 
were,  however,  not   likely  to  attempt  any  further  conquests : 
the  court  of  Constantinople  had  relapsed  into  its  usual  indo- 
lence ;  nor  had  they  much  right  to  boast  of  successes  rather 
due  to  the  Saracen  auxiliaries  whom  they  hired  from  Sicily. 
No  momentous  revolution  apparently  threatened  the  south  of 
Italy,  and  least  of  all  could  it  be  anticipated  from  what  quar- 
ter the  storm  was  about  to  gather. 

The  followers  of  Rollo,  who  rested  from  plunder  and  piracy 
in  the  quiet  possession  of  Normandy,  became  de-  «^ttl        t 
vout  professors  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  partial-  of  the 
larly  addicted  to  the  custom  of  pilgrimage,  whieh  JJ^Sa!18** 
gratified   their  curiosity  and  spirit   of   adventure. 

i  Catapanus    from  Kara  7TUV,  one  employed  in  general   administration   »f  at 
fairs. 


350  ROBERT  GUISCARD.         Chap.  III.  Part  1 

In  small  bodies,  well  .armed  on  account  of  the  lawless  charac- 
ter of  the  countries   through  which  they  passed,  the  Norman 

pilgrims  visited  the  shrines  of  Italy  and  even  the  Holy  Land. 
Some  of  these,  vi  ry  early  in  the  eleventh  century,  were  en- 
gaged by  a  Lombard  prince  of  Salerno  against  the  Saracens, 
who  had  invaded  his  territory ;  and  through  that  superiority 
of  valor,  and  perhaps  of  corporal  strength,  which  .this  singular 
people'  seem  to  have  possessed  above  all  other  Europeans, 
they  made  surprising  havoc  among  the  enemy.1  This  ex- 
ploit led  to  fresh  engagements,  and  these  engagements  drew 
new  adventurers  from  Normandy  ;  they  founded  the  little 
city  of  Aversa,  near  Capua,  and  were  employed  by  the 
Greeks  against  the  Saracens  of  Sicily.  But,  though  perform- 
ing splendid  services  in  this  war,  the}'  were  ill  repaid  by 
their  ungrateful  employers ;  and  being  by  no  means  of  a  tem- 
per to  bear  with  injury,  they  revenged  themselves  by  a  sud- 
a.d.  1042.  ^en  invasion  of  Apulia.  This  province  was  speedi- 
conquests  \y  subdued,  and  divided  among  twelve  Norman 
GuiscaS.  counts ;  but  soon  afterwards  Robert  Guiscard,  one 
1A,.        of  twelve  brothers,  many  of  whom  were  renowned 

A.D.  105<.  ,  T       ,.  .-ii 

in  these  Italian  wars,  acquired  the  sovereignty  ; 
and,  adding  Calabria  to  his  conquests,  put  an  end  to  the  long 
dominion  of  the  Eastern  emperors  in  Italy.2  He  reduced 
the  principalities  of  Salerno  and  Benevento,  in  the  latter  in- 
stance sharing  the  spoil  with  the  pope,  who  took  the  city  to 
himself,  while  Robert  retained  the  territory.  His  conquests 
in  Greece,  which  he  invaded  with  the  magnificent  design  of 
a  d  1061        overthrowing  the   Eastern  empire,  were   at  least 

equally  splendid,  though  less  durable.  Roger,  his 
younger  brother,  undertook  meanwhile  the  romantic  enter- 
prise, as  it  appeared,  of  conquering  the  island  of  Sicily  with 
a  small  body  of  Norman  volunteers.  But  the  Saracens  were 
broken  into  petty  slates,  and  discouraged  by  the  bad  success 
of  their  brethren  in  Spain  and  Sardinia.  After  many  years 
of  war  Roger  became  sole  master  of  Sicily,  and  took  the 
title  of  Count.  The  son  of  this  prince,  upon  the  extinction 
of  Robert  Guiscard's  posterity,  united  the  two  Norman  sover- 

i  Giannone,  t.  ii.  p.  7  [edit.  1753].     I  *  The  final  blow  was  given  So  the  Greek 

should   observe  that   St.  Marc,    a   more  domination  over  Italy  by  the  capture  of 

critical   writer   in   examination    of  facta  Bari  in  1071,  after  a  sietre  of  four  years 

than  Giannone,  treats  this  first  adventure  It  had  for  some  time  been  confined  u 

of  the   Normans  as   unauthenticated.  -  this  single  city      Muratori.  St.  Marc, 
abrege  Chrouologique,  p.  990. 


ltaly.  PROGRESS   OF   THE  LOMBARD  CITIES.  ool 

eignties,  and,  subjugating   the    free   republics    of 
Naples  and  Amain,  and  the  principality  of  Capua, 
established  a  boundary  which  has  hardly  been  changed  since 
his  time.1 

The  first  successes  of  these  Norman  leaders  were  viewed 
unfavorably  by  the  popes.  Leo  IX.  marched  in  Panai  in_ 
person  against  Robert  Guiscard  with  an  army  of  vestitures 
German  mercenaries,  but  was  beaten  and  made  °  L  ap  ei 
prisoner  in  this  unwise  enterprise,  the  -vandal  of  which  noth- 
ing but  good  fortune  could  have  lightened.  He  fell,  however, 
into  the  hands  of  a  devout  people,  who  implored  his  absolu- 
tion for  the  crime  of  defending  themselves ;  and,  whether 
through  gratitude,  or  as  the  price  of  his  liberation,  invested 
them  with  their  recent  conquests  in  Apulia,  as  fiefs  of  the 
Holy  See.  This  investiture  was  repeated  and  enlarged  as 
the  popes,  especially  in  their  contention  with  Henry  IV.  and 
Henry  V.,  found  the  advantage  of  using  the  Normans  as 
faithful  auxiliaries.  Finally,  Innocent  II.,  in  1139,  conferred 
upon  Roger  the  title  of  King  of  Sicily.  It  is  difficult  to 
understand  by  what  pretence  these  countries  could  be  claimed 
by  the  see  of  Rome  in  sovereignty,  unless  by  virtue  of  the  pre- 
tended donation  of  Constantirie,  or  that  of  Louis  the  Debonair, 
which  is  hardly  less  suspicious ; 2  and  least  of  all  how  Inno- 
cent II.  could  surrender  the  liberties  of  the  city  of  Naples, 
whether  that  was  considered  as  an  independent  republic,  or 
as  a  portion  of  the  Greek  empire.  But  the  Normans,  who 
had  no  title  but  their  swords,  were  naturally  glad  to  give  an 
appearance  of  legitimacy  to  their  conquest ;  and  the  kingdom 
of  Naples,  even  in  the  hands  of  the  most  powerful  princes  in 
Europe,  never  ceased  to  pay  a  feudal  acknowledgment  to  the 
chair  of  St.  Peter. 

The  revolutions  which  time  brought  forth  on  the  opposite 
side  of  Italy  were  still  more  interesting.     Under  Pr0OTess  of 
the  Lombard  and  French  princes  every  city  with  the  Loin- 
its    adjacent    district  was  subject  to   the   govern- 
ment  and  jurisdiction  of  a   count,  who  was   himself  subor- 

1  M.  Sismondi  has  excelled  himself  in  the  interpolated,  if  not  spurious,  grant* 
describing  the  couquest  of  Amalfi  and  of  Louis  the  Debonair,  Otho  I.,  and 
Naples  by  Roger  Guiscard  (t.  i.  c.  4) ;  Henry  II.  to  the  see  of  Rome,  were  pro 
warming  his  imagination  with  visions  of  mulgated  about  the  time  of  the  first  con- 
liberty  and  virtue  in  those  obscure  re-  cessions  to  the  Normans,  in  order  to  givg 
publics,  which  no  real  history  survives  the  popes  a  colorable  pretext  to  dispose 
"o  dispel.  of  the  southern  provinces  of  Italy,    a.s 

2  Mumtori   presumes  to  suppose   that  lUGy. 


352  PROGRESS   OF  THE  Chap.  III.  Part  I 

dinate  to  the  duke  or  marquis  of  the  province.  From  these 
counties  it  was  the  practice  of  the  first  German  emperors 
to  dismember  particular  towns  or  tracts  of  country,  grant- 
ing them  upon  a  feudal  tenure  to  rural  lords,  by  many  of 
whom  also  the  same  title  was  assumed.  Tim-  by  degrees 
the  authority  of  the  original  officers  was  confined  almost  to 
the  walls  of  their  own  cities;  and  in  many  eases  the  bishops 
obtained  a  grant  of  the  temporal  government,  and  exercised 
the  functions  which  had  belonged  to  the  count.1 

It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  time  at  which  the  cities  of 
Lombardy  began  to  assume  a  republican  form  of  government, 
or  to  trace  with  precision  the  gradations  of  their  progress. 
The  last  historian  of  Italy  asserts  that  Otho  the  First  erected 
them  into  municipal  communities,  and  permitted  the  election 
of  their  magistrates ;  but  of  this  he  produces  no  evidence ; 
and  Muratori,  from  whose  authority  it  is  rash  to  depart  with* 
out  strong  reasons,  is  not  only  silent  about  any  charters,  but 
discovers  no  express  unequivocal  testimonies  of  a  popular 
government  for  the  whole  eleventh  century .a  The  first  ap- 
pearance of  the  citizens  acting  for  themselves  is  in  a  tumult 
at  Milan  in  991,  when  the  archbishop  was  expelled  from  the 
city.8  But  this  was  a  transitory  ebullition,  and  we  must  de- 
scend lower  for  more  specific  proofs.  It  is  possible  that  the 
disputed  sueces.-ion  of  Ardoin  and  Henry,  'at  the  beginning 
of  the  eleventh  a^e,  and  the  kind  of  interregnum  which  then 
took  place,  gave  the  inhabitants  an  opportunity  of  choosing 
magistrates  and  of  sharing  in  public  deliberations.  A  similar 
relaxation  indeed  of  government  in  France  had  exposed  the 
people  to  greater  servitude,  and  established  a  feudal  aristoc- 
racy. But  the  feudal  tenures  seem  not  to  have  produced  in 
Italy  that  systematic  and  regular  subordination  which  existed 
in  France  during  the  same  period ;  nor  were  the  mutual 
duties  of  the  relation  between  lord  and  vassal  so  well  under- 
stood or  observed.  Hence  we  find  not  only  disputes,  but 
actual  civil  war,  between  the  lesser  gentry  or  vavassors,  and 
the  higher  nobility,  their  immediate  superiors.  These  differ- 
ences were  adjusted  by  Conrad  the  Salic,  who  published  a 
remarkable  edict  in  1037,  by  which  the  feudal  law  of  Italy 
was  reduced  to  more  certainty.4     From   this  disunion  among 

i  Muratori,  Antiquit.  Italiae,  Divert.  8 ;        -  Sisinondi,  t.  i.  p.  97,  3S4 ;  Muratori 
Annali  d'ltalia,  a.d.  989;  Anticluta  Es-    Dissert.  49. 
tonsi,  p  26.  8  Muratori,  Annali  d'ltalia. 

4  Muratori,  Aimali  d'ltalia      St  Marc. 


italt.  LOMBARD  CITIES.  353 

the  members  of  the  feudal  confederacy,  it  was  more  easy  for 
the  citizens  to  render  themselves  secure  against  its  dominion. 
The  cities  too  of  Lombard}'  were  far  more  populous  and 
better  defended  than  those  of  France ;  they  had  learned  to 
stand  sieges  in  the  Hungarian  invasions  of  the  tenth  century, 
and  had  acquired  the  right  of  protecting  themselves  by  strong 
fortifications.  Those  which  had  been  placed  under  the  tem- 
poral government  of  their  bishops  had  peculiar  advantages  in 
struggling  for  emancipation.1  This  circumstance  in  the  state 
of  Lombardy  I  consider  as  highly  important  towards  explain- 
ing the  subsequent  revolution.  Notwithstanding  several  ex 
ceptions,  a  churchman  was  less  likely  to  be  bold  and  active 
in  command  than  a  soldier;  and  the  sort  of  election  which 
was  always  necessary,  and  sometimes  more  than  nominal,  on 
a  vacancy  of  the  see,  kept  up  among  the  citizens  a  notion 
that  the  authority  of  their  bishop  and  chief  magistrate  ema- 
nated in  some  degree  from  themselves.  In  many  instances, 
especially  in  the  church  of  Milan,  the  earliest  perhaps,  and 
certainly  the  most  famous  of  Lombard  republics,  there  occurred 
a  disputed  election ;  two,  or  even  three,  competitors  claimed 
the  archiepiscopal  functions,  and  were  compelled,  in  the  ab- 
sence of  the  emperors,  to  obtain  the  exercise  of  them  by  means 
of  their  own-faction  among  the  citizens.'2 

i  The  bishops  seem  to  have  become  others,  the  Piedmontese  cities  are  hardlv 
eouuts,  or  temporal  governors,  of  their  to  be  reckoned  among  the  republics  of 
sees,  about  the  end  of  the  tenth,  or  be  Lombardy. — Denina,  Istoria  dell'  Italia 
fore  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century.  Occidentale,  t.  i.  p.  191. 
Muratori,  Diss.  8;  Denina,  1.  ix.  c.  11;  -  Muratori,  a.d.  1345.  Sometimes  the 
St.  Marc,  a.d.  1041,  1047,  1070.  In  Ar-  inhabitants  of  a  city  refused  to  acknowl- 
nulf's  History  of  Milan,  written  before  edge  a  bishop  named  by  the  emperor,  as 
the  close  of  the  latter  age,  we  have  a  con-  happened  at  Pavia  and  Asti  about  1057- 
temporary  evidence.  And  from  the  peru-  Arnulf,  p.  22.  This  was,  in  other  words, 
sal  of  that  work  I  should  infer  that  the  setting  up  themselves  as  republics.  But 
archbishop  was,  in  the  middle  of  the  the  most  remarkable  instance  of  this 
eleventh  century,  the  chief  magistrate  of  kind  occurred  in  1070,  when  the  Milanese 
the  city.  But,  at  the  same  time,  it  ap-  absolutely  rejected  Godfrey,  appointed 
pears  highly  probable  that  an  assembly  by  Henry  IV.,  and,  after  a  resistance  of 
of  the  citizens,  or  at  least  a  part  of  the  several  years,  obliged  the  emperor  to  fix 
"itizens,  partook  in  the  administration  upon  another  person.  The  city  had  beeu 
of  public  affairs.  Muratori,  Scriptores  previously  involved  in  long  and  violent 
llerum  Italicarum,  t.  iv.  p.  16,  22,23,  tumults,  which,  though  rather  belonging 
and  particularly  the  last.  In  most  cities  to  ecclesiastical  than  civil  history,  as  they 
to  the  eastward  of  the  Tesino,  the  bishops  arose  out  of  the  endeavors  made  to  re- 
lost  their  temporal  authority  in  the  form  the  conduct  and  enforce  the  celibacy 
twelfth  century,  though  the  archbishop  of  the  clergy,  had  a  considerable  tendency 
of  Milau  had  no  small  prerogatives  while  to  diminish  the  archbishop's  authority, 
that  city  was  governed  as  a  republic,  and  to  give  a  republican  character  to  the 
But  in  Piedmont  they  continued  longer  inhabitants.  These  proceedings  are  told 
in  the  enjoyment  of  power.  Yereelli,  at  great  length  by  St.  Marc,  t.  Hi.  a.d. 
and  even  Turin,  were  almost  subject  to  1056-lOu.  Ainulf  and  Landulf  are  ttw 
their  respective  prelates  till  the  fcliir-  original  sources, 
teenth  century.  For  this  reason,  among 
vol.  i.  —  .u.                 23 


354     PROGRESS  OF  THE  LOMBARD  CITIES.    Chap.  III.  Part  i 

These  were  the  general  causes  which,  operating  at  various 
times  during  the  eleventh  century,  seem  gradually  to  hav 
produced  a  republican  form  of  government  in  the  Italian  cit- 
ies. But  this  part  of  history  is  very  obscure.  The  archives 
of  all  cities  before  the  reign  of  Frederic  Babarossa  have  per- 
ished. For  many  years  there  is  a  great  deficiency  of  con- 
temporary Lombard  historians;  and  those  of  a  later  age,  who 
endeavored  to  search  into  the  antiquities  of  their  country 
have  found  only  some  barren  and  insulated  events  to  record. 
We  perceive,  however,  throughout  the  eleventh  century,  that 
the  cities  were  continually  in  warfare  with  each  other.  This, 
indeed,  was  according  to  the  manners  of  that  age,  and  no 
inference  can  ab-olutely  be  drawn  from,  it  as  to  their  internal 
freedom.  But  it  is  observable  that  their  chronicles  speak,  in 
recording  these  transactions,  of  the  people,  and  not  of  their 
leaders,  which  is  the  true  republican  tone  of  history.  Thus, 
in  the  Annals  of  Pisa,  we  read,  under  the  years  1002  and  1004, 
of  victories  gained  by  the  Pisans  over  the  people  of  Lucca; 
in  1006,  that  the  Pisans  and  Genoese  conquered  Sardinia.1 
These  annals,  indeed,  are  not  by  a  contemporary  writer,  nor 
perhaps  of  much  authority.  But  we  have  an  original  account 
of  a  war  that  broke  out  in  1057,  between  Pavia  and  Milan, 
in  which  the  citizens  are  said  to  have  raised  armies,  made  al- 
liances, hired  foreign  troops,  and  in  every  respect  acted  like 
independent  states.'2  There  was,  in  fact,  no  power  left  in  the 
empire  to  control  them.  The  two  Henrys  IV.  and  V.  were 
so  much  embarrassed  during  the  quarrel  concerning  investi- 
tures, and  the  continual  troubles  of  Germany,  that  they  were 
less  likely  to  interfere  with  the  rising  freedom  of  the  Italian 
cities,  than  to  purchase  their  assistance  by  large  concessions. 
Henry  IV.  granted  a  charter  to  Pisa  in  1081,  full  of  the  most 
important  privileges,  promising  even  not  to  name  any  mar- 
quis of  Tuscany  without  the  people's  consent  ;3  and  it  is  possi 
ble  that,  although  the  instruments  have  perished,  other  [daces 
might  obtain  similar  advantages.  However  this  may  be,  it  is 
certain  that  before  the  death  of  Henry  V.,  in  1125,  almost  all 

1  Marat.  Diss.  45.     Arnulfus,  the  his-  That   of   Landulphus  corroborates   this 

torian   of  Milan,  makes  no  mention  of  supposition,  which  indeed  is  capable  of 

any  temporal  counts,  which  seems  to  be  proof  as  to  Milan  and  several  other  cities 

a   proof    that   there   were    none   in    any  in  which  the  temporal  government  had 

authority.     Be  speaks  always  of  Mediola-  been  legally  voted  in  the  bishops. 

nenses,  Papienses,  Rarenates,  &c.    This  2jiur  t.  Diss.  45;  Amult  Tlist.  Medio 

history  was  written  about  1085,  but  re-  Ian.  p.  22. 

lates  to  the  earlier  part  of  that  century.  3Murat.  Dissert.  45 


,ialy.  LOMBARD  ACQUISITIONS.  355 

the  cities  of  Lombirdy,  and  many  among  those  of  Tuscany, 
weie  accustomed  to  elect  their  own  magistrates,  and  to  act  as 
independent  communities  in  waging  war  and  in  domestic  gov- 
ernment.1 

The  territory  subjected  originally  to  the  count  or  bishop 
of  these  cities-  had  been  reduced,  as  I  mentioned  Theirae_ 
above,  by  numerous  eoncessions  to  the  rural  nobility,  uuisitkms  of 
But  the  new  republics,  deeming  themselves  entitled  em  ory' 
to  all  which  their  former  governors  had  once  possessed,  began 
to  attack  their  nearest  neighbors,  and  to  recover  the  sov- 
ereignty of  all  their  ancient  territory.  They  besieged  the 
castles  of  the  rural  counts,  and  successively  reduced  them  into 
subjection.  They  suppressed  some  minor  communities,  which 
had  been  formed  in  imitation  of  themselves  by  little  towns 
belonging  to  their  district.  Sometimes  they  purchased  feudal 
superiorities  or  territorial  jurisdictions,  and,  according  to  a 
policy  not  unusual  with  the  stronger  party,  converted  the 
rights  of  property  into  those  of  government.2  Hence,  at  the 
middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  we  are  assured  by  a  contempo- 
rary writer  that  hardly  any  nobleman  could  be  found,  except 
the  marquis  of  Montferrat,  who  had  not  submitted  to  some 
city.3  We  may  except,  also,  I  should  presume,  the  families 
of  Este  and  Malaspina,  as  well  as  that  of  Savoy.  Muratori 
produces  many  charters  of  mutual  compact  between  the 
nobles  and  the  neighboring  cities  ;  whereof  one  invariable  ar- 
ticle is,  that  the  former  should  reside  within  the  walls  a  cer- 
tain number  of  months  in  the  year.4  The  rural  nobility,  thus 
deprived  of  the  independence  which  had  endeared  their  cas- 
tles, imbibed  a  new  ambition  of  directing  the  municipal  gov- 
ernment of  the  cities,  which  consequently,  during  this  period 
of  the  republics,  fell  chiefly  into  the  hands  of  the  superior 
families.  It  was  the  sagacious  policy  of  the  Lombards  to 
invite  settlers  by  throwing  open  to  them  the  privileges  of  citi- 
zenship, and  sometimes  they  even  bestowed  them  by  compul- 
sion. Sometimes  a  city,  imitating  the  wisdom  of  ancient 
Rome,    granted    these    privileges    to    all  the    inhabitants  of 

1  Murat.  Aunali  d'ltal.  a.d.  1107.  zione,  e  1'  altro  iT  un'  altra.     Denina,  ] 

2  II  dominio  utile  delle  citta  e  de'  vil-  xii.  c.  3.  This  produced  a  vast  intricacy 
Hggi  era  talvolta  diviso  fra  due  o  pin  pa-  of  titles,  which  was  of  course  advanta 
droni,  ossiacaes'  asseguas^ero  a  ciascuno  geous  to  those  who  wanted  a  pretext  foi 
diversi   quarfcieri,  o  si  dividessoro  i  pro-  robbing  their  neighbors. 

fenti  della  gabelle,  ovvero  che  I'uno  sig-        3  Otho  Frisingens.  1.  ii   c.  13 
uore  scodesse  d'una  specie  della  giurisdi-        4  Murat.  Diss.  49 


356  THEIR  MUTUAL  ANIMOSITIES.    Chap.  III.  Part  l 

another.1  Thus,  the  principal  cities,  and  especially  Milan, 
reached,  before  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  a  degree  of 
population  very  far  beyond  that  of  the  capitals  of  the  great 
kingdoms.  Within  their  strong  walls  and  deep  trendies,  and 
in  the  midst  of  their  well-peopled  streets,  the  industrious 
dwelt  secure  from  the  license  of  armed  pillagers  and  the  op- 
pression of  feudal  tyrants.  Artisans,  whom  the  military 
landholders  contemned,  acquired  and  deserved  the  right  of 
bearing  arms  for  their  own  and  the  public  defence."  Their 
occupations  became  liberal,  because  they  were  the  foundation 
of  their  political  franchises ;  the  citizens  were  classed  in  com- 
panies according  to  their  respective  crafts,  each  of  which  had 
its  tribune  or  standardbearer  (gonfalonier),  at  whose  com- 
mand, when  any  tumult  arose  or  enemy  threatened,  they 
rushed   in  arms  to   muster  in   the  market-place. 

But,  unhappily,  we  cannot  extend  the  sympathy  which  in- 
Their  '  stitutions  so  full  of  liberty  create  to  the  national 
mutual  conduct  of  these  little  republics.      Their  love  of 

animosities.  free(]om  was  anoyed  by  that  restless  spirit,  from 
which  a  democracy  is  seldom  exempt,  of  tyrannizing  over 
weaker  neighbors.  They  played  over  again  the  tragedy  of 
ancient  Greece,  with  all  its  circumstances  of  inveterate  hatred, 
unjust  ambition,  and  atrocious  retaliation,  though  with  less 
consummate  actors  upon  the  scene.  Among  all  the  Lombard 
cities,  Milan  was  the  most  conspicuous,  as  well  for  power  and 
population  as  for  the  abuse  of  those  resources  by  arbitrary 
and  ambitious  conduct.  Thus,  in  1111,  they  razed  the  town 
of  Lodi  to  the  ground,  distributing  the  inhabitants  among  six 
villages,  and  subjecting  them  to  an  unrelenting  despotism.8 
Thus,  in  1118,  they  commenced  a  war  of  ten  years'  duration 
with  the  little  city  of  Como ;  but  the  surprising  perseverance 
of  its  inhabitants  procured  for  them  better  terms  of  capitula- 

1  Murat.  Diss.  49.  Lodi  was  of  very  old  standing.     It  origl- 

2  Otho  Frisingensis  ap.  Murat.  Scr.  Rer.  nated,  according  to  Arnulf.  in  the  resist- 
ital.  t.  vi.  p.  708.  Ut  etiam  ad  compri-  ance  made  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  latter 
mendos  viciuos  materia  non  careant,  in-  city  to  an  attempt  made  by  archbishop 
ferioris  ordinis  juvenes,  vel  quoslibet  Eribert  to  force  a  bishop  of  his  own 
conteuiptibilium  etiam  mechanicarum  nomination  upon  them.  The  bloodshed, 
artium  opifices,  quos  eaeterae  gentes  ab  plunder,  and  conflagrations  which  had 
honestioribus  et  liberioribus  studiis  tan-  ensued,  would,  he  says,  fill  a  volume,  if 
|uam  pestem  propellunt,  ad  militias  cin-  they  were  related  at  length.  Scriptores 
gulum.  vel  dignitatum  gradns  assumere  Re.rum  Italic  t.  iv.  p.  16.  And  this  is 
non  dedignantur.  Ex  quo  factum  est,  the  testimony  of  a  writer  who  did  not 
at  caeteris  orbis  civitatibus,  divitiis  et  live  beyond  1085.  Seventy  years  more 
potentia  pra^etnineant.  either  of  hostility  or  servitude   elapsed 

8  The    animosity   between    Milan   and    before  Lodi  was  permitted  to  respire. 


Italy.  SOVEREIGNTY   OF  THE  EMPERORS.  357 

tion,  though  they  lost  their  original  independence.  The  Cre- 
monese  treated  so  harshly  the  town  of  Crema  that  it  revolted 
from  them,  and  put  itself  under  the  protection  of  Milan. 
Cities  of  more  equal  forces  carried  on  interminable  hostilities 
by  wasting  each  other's  territory,  destroying  the  harvests,  and 
burning  the  villages. 

The  sovereignty  of  the  emperors,  meanwhile,  though  not 
very   effective,   was    in    theory   always   admitted.  Sovere}o.nt 
Their  name  was  used  in  public  acts,  and  appeared  of  the  ° 
upon  the  coin.     When  they  came  into  Italy  they  emperors- 
had  certain  customary  supplies  of  provisions,  called  fodrum 
regale,  at  the  expense  of  the  city  where  they  resided  ;  during 
their  presence  all  inferior  magistracies  were  suspended,  and 
the  right  of  jurisdiction  devolved  upon  them  alone.    But  such 
was  the  jealousy  of  the  Lombards,  that  they  built  the  royal 
palaces  outside  their  gates ;  a  precaution  to  which  the  empe- 
rors were  compelled  to  submit.     This  was  at  a  very  early 
time  a  subject  of  contention  between  the  inhabitants  of  Pavia 
and  Conrad  II.,  whose  palace,  seated  in  the  heart  of  the  city, 
they  had  demolished  in  a  sedition,  and  were  unwilling  to  re- 
build in  that  situation.1 

Such  was  the  condition  of  Italy  when  Frederic  Barbarossa, 
duke  of  Suabia,  and  nephew  of  the  last  emperor,  Frederic 
Conrad  III.,  ascended  the  throne  of  Germany.  Barbaross»- 
His  accession  forms  the  commencement  of  a  new  period,  the 
duration  of  which  is  about  one  hundred  years,  and  which  is 
terminated  by  the  death  of  Conrad  IV.,  the  last  emperor  of 
the  house  of  Suabia.  It  is  characterized,  like  the  former,  by 
three  distinguishing  features  in  Italian  history ;  the  victorious 
struggle  of  the  Lombard  and  other  cities  for  independence,  the 
final  establishment  of  a  temporal  sovereignty  over  the  middle 
provinces  by  the  popes,  and  the  union  of  the  kingdom  of  Na- 
ples to  the  dominions  of  the  house  of  Suabia. 

In  Frederic  Barbarossa  the  Italians  found  a  very  different 
sovereign  from  the  two  last  emperors,  Lothaire  and  Conrad 
III.,  who  had  seldom  appeared  in  Italy,  and  with  forces  quite 
inadequate  to  control  such  insubordinate  subjects.  The  dis- 
tinguished valor  and  ability  of  this  prince  rendered  a  severe 
and  arbitrary  temper  and  a  haughty  conceit  of  his  imperial 
rights  more  formidable.    He  believed,  or  professed  to  believe 

1  Otho  Fri6ingens.  p.  710;    Muratori,  a.d.  1027. 


358  FREDERIC  BARBAROSSA.  Chap.  III.  Part  1 

the  magnificent  absurdity,  that,  as  successor  of  Augustus,  lie 
inherited  the  kingdoms  of  the  world.  In  the  same  right,  he 
more  powerfully,  if  not  more  rationally,  laid  claim  to  the 
entire  prerogatives  of  the  Roman  emperors  over  their  own 
subjects;  and  in  this  the  professors  of  the  civil  law,  which 
was  now  diligently  studied,  lent  him  their  aid  with  the  utmost 
servility.  To  such  a  disposition  the  self-government  of  the 
Lombard  cities  appeared  mere  rebellion.  Milan  especially, 
the  most  renowned  of  them  all,  drew  down  upon  herself  his 
inveterate  resentment.  He  found,  unfortunately,  too  good  a 
pretence  in  her  behavior  towards  Lodi.  Two  natives  of  that 
ruined  city  threw  themselves  at  the  emperor's  feet,  imploring 
him,  as  the  ultimate  source  of  justice,  to  redress  the  wrongs 
of  their  country.  It  is  a  striking  proof  of  the  terror  in- 
spired by  Milan  that  the  consuls  of  Lodi  disavowed  the  com- 
plaints of  their  countrymen,  and  the  inhabitants  trembled  at 
the  danger  of  provoking  a  summary  vengeance,  against 
which  the  imperial  arms  seemed  no  protection.1  The  Milan- 
ese, however,  abstained  from  attacking  the  people  of  Lodi, 
though  they  treated  with  contempt  the  emperor's  order  to 
leave  them  at  liberty.  Frederic  meanwhile  came  into  Italy, 
and  held  a  diet  at  Roncaglia,  where  complaints  poured  in 
from  many  quarters  against  the  Milanese.  Pavia  and  Cre- 
mona, their  ancient  enemies,  were  impatient  to  renew  hostili- 
ties under  the  imperial  auspices.  Brescia,  Tortona,  and 
Crema  were  allies,  or  rather  dependents,  of  Milan.  Frederic 
soon  took  occasion  to  attack  the  latter  confederacy.  Tortona 
was  compelled  to  surrender  and  levelled  to  the  ground.  But 
a  feudal  army  was  soon  dissolved ;  the  emperor  had  much  to 
demand  his  attention  at  Rome,  where  he  was  on  ill  terms 
with  Adrian  IV. ;  and  when  the  imperial  troops  were  with- 
drawn from  Lombardy,  the  Milanese  rebuilt  Tortona,  and 
expelled  the  citizens  of  Lodi  from  their  dwellings.  Frederic 
assembled  a  fresh  army,  to  which  almost  every  city  of  Lom- 
bardy, willingly  or  by  force,  contributed  its  militia.  It  is  said 
to  have  exceeded  a  hundred  thousand  men.  The  Milanese 
shut  themselves  up  within  their  walls  ;  and  perhaps  might 
have  defied  the  imperial  forces,  if  their  immense  population, 
which  gave  them  confidence  in  arms,  had  not  exposed  them 

i  See  an  interesting  account  of  these  reproaches  Morena  for  partiality  towards 

circumstances  in  the  narrative  of  Otho  Frederic   in    rht>    Milanese    war,   should 

Morena,  a  citizen  of  Lodi.     Script.  Rer.  have  remembered    the    provocations  of 

ft'l     t.  vi.    p    9G6.     M.   Sismondi,   who  Lodi.     Hist,  des  Repub.  Ital.  t.  ii.  p.  103 


italy.  CAPTURE  OF  MILAN.  o'59 

to  a  different  enemy.  Milan  was  obliged  by  hunger  to  capitu- 
ate,  upon  conditions  not  very  severe,  if  a  vanquished  people 
could  ever  safely  rely  upon  the  convention  that  testifies  their 
submission. 

Frederic,  after  the  surrender  of  Milan,  held  a  diet  at 
Roncaglia,  where  the  effect  of  his  victories  was  Diet  of 
fatally  perceived.  The  bishops,  the  higher  nobility,  Roucagiia. 
the  lawyers,  vied  with  one  another  in  exalting  his 
prerogatives.  He  defined  the  regalian  rights,  as  they  were 
called,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  exclude  the  cities  and  private 
proprietors  from  coining  money,  and  from  tolls  or  territorial 
dues,  which  they  had  for  many  years  possessed.  These, 
however,  he  permitted  them  to  retain  for  a  pecuniary  stipula- 
tion. A  more  important  innovation  was  the  appointment  of 
magistrates,  with  the  title  of  podesta,  to  administer  justice 
concurrently  with  the  consuls  ;  but  he  soon  proceeded  to 
abolish  the  latter  office  in  many  cities,  and  to  throw  the  whole 
government  into  the  hands  of  his  own  magistrates.  He  pro- 
hibited the  cities  from  levying  war  against  each  other.  It 
may  be  presumed  that  he  showed  no  favor  to  Milan.  The 
capitulation  was  set  at  naught  in  its  most  express  provisions ; 
a  podesta  was  sent  to  supersede  the  consuls,  and  part  of  the 
territory  taken  away.  Whatever  might  be  the  risk  of  resist- 
ance, and  the  Milanese  had  experience  enough  not  to  under- 
value it,  they  were  determined  rather  to  see  their  liberties  at 
once  overthrown  than  gradually  destroyed  by  a  faithless 
tyrant.  They  availed  themselves  of  the  absence  of  his  army 
to  renew  the  war.  Its  issue  was  more  calamitous  than  that 
of  the  last.  Almost  all  Lombardy  lay  patient  under  subjec- 
tion. The  small  town  of  Crema,  always  the  faithful  ally  of 
Milan,  stood  a  memorable  siege  against  the  imperial  army  ; 
but  the  inhabitants  were  ultimately  compelled  to  capitulate 
for  their  lives,  and  the  vindictive  Cremonese  razed  their 
dwellings  to  the  ground.1  But  all  smaller  calami-  Capturean<i 
ties  w7ere  forgotten  when  the  great  city  of  Milan,  destruction 

o  o  j  '  q£  Milan. 

worn  out  by  famine  rather  than  subdued  by  force, 

was  reduced  to    surrender    at  discretion.     Lombardy  stood 

in  anxious  suspense  to  know  the  determination  of  Frederic 

l  The  siege  of  Crema  is  told  at  great  count  of  the  methods  used  in  the  attack 

length  by  Otto  Morena;  it  is  interesting,  and  defence  of  fortified  places  before  th« 

not  only  as  a  display  of  extraordinary,  introduction    of  artillery.     Scrip.'  R«r 

though   unsuccessful,  perseverance  and  Ital.  t.  vi.  p.  1032-1052. 
intrepidity .  bu  i  as  the  most  detailed  ac 


360  LEAGUE  OF  LOMBARDY      Chap.  III.  Part  i 

respecting  this  ancient  metropolis,  the  seat  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian emperors,  and  second  only  to  Rome  in  the  hierarchy  of 
the  Latin  church.  A  delay  of  three  weeks  excited  fallacious 
hopes ;  but  at  the  end  of  that  time  an  order  was  given  to  the 
Milanese  to  evacuate  their  habitations.  The  deserted  streets 
were  instantly  occupied  by  the  imperial  army  ;  the  people  of 
Pavia  and  Cremona,  of  Lodi  and  Como,  were  commissioned 
to  revenge  themselves  on  the  respective  quarters  of  the  city 
assigned  to  them ;  and  in  a  few  days  the  pillaged  churches 
stood  alone  amidst  the  ruins  of  what  had  been  Milan. 

There  was  now  little  left  of  that  freedom  to  which  Lom- 
bardy  had  aspired  :  it  was  gone  like  a  pleasant 
dream,  and  she  awoke  to  the  fears  and  miseries  of 
servitude.  Frederic  obeyed  the  dictates  of  his  vindictive 
temper,  and  of  the  policy  usual  among  state -men.  He  abro- 
gated the  consular  regimen  in  some  even  of  the  cities  which 
had  supported  him,  and  established  his  poclesta  in  their  place. 
This  magistrate  was  always  a  stranger,  frequently  not  even 
an  Italian  ;  and  he  came  to  his  office  with  all  those  prejudices 
against  the  people  he  was  to  govern  which  cut  off  every  hope 
of  justice  and  humanity.  The  citizens  of  Lombardy,  espe- 
cially the  Milanese,  who  had  been  dispersed  in  the  villages 
adjoining  their  ruined  capital,  were  unable  to  meet  the  per- 
petual demands  of  tribute.  In  some  parts,  it  is  said,  two 
thirds  of  the  produce  of  their  lands,  the  only  wealth  that  re- 
mained, were  extorted  from  them  by  the  imperial  officers. 
It  was  in  vain  that  they  prostrated  themselves  at  the  feet  of 
Frederic.  He  gave  at  the  best  only  vague  promises  of  re- 
dress ;  they  were  in  his  eyes  rebels  ;  his  delegates  had  acted 
as  faithful  officers,  whom,  even  if  they  had  gone  a  little  be- 
yond his  intentions,  he  could  not  be  expected  to  punish. 

But  there  still  remained  at  the  heart  of  Lombardy  the 
League  of  strong  principle  of  national  liberty,  imperishable 
Lombardy  among  the  perishing  armies  of  her  patriots,  incon- 
Frederic.  sumable  in  the  conflagration  of  her  cities.1  Those 
a.d.  1167.  whom  private  animosities  had  led  to  assist  the 
German  conqueror  blushed  at  the  degradation  of  their  coun- 
try, and  at  the  share  they  had  taken  in  it.  A  league  was 
secretly  formed,  in  which  Cremona,  one  of  the  chief  cities  on 
fhe  imperial  side,  took  a  prominent  part.      Those  beyond 

i  Quae  neque  Dardaniis  campis  potuere  perire, 
Nee  cum  capta  capi,  nee  cum  combusta  cremari. —  Enmui. 


iTALr.  AUAlxNST   FREDERIC.  361 

the  Adige,  hitherto  not  much  engaged  in  the  disputes  oi 
central  Lombard}',  had  already  formed  a  separate  confederacy 
to  secure  themselves  from  encroachments,  which  appeared 
the  more  unjust,  as  they  had  never  borne  arms  against  the 
emperor.  Their  first  successes  corresponded  to  nR4 
the  justice  of  their  cause ;  Frederic  was  repulsed 
from  the  territory  of  Verona,  a  fortunate  augury  for  the  rest 
of  Lombardy.  These  two  clusters  of  cities  on  the  east  and 
west  of  the  Adige  now  united  themselves  into  the  famous 
Lombard  league,  the  terms  of  which  were  settled  in  a  general 
diet.  Their  alliance  was  to  last  twenty  years,  during  which 
they  pledged  themselves  to  mutual  assistance  against  any  one 
who  should  exact  more  from  them  than  they  had  been  used 
to  perform  from  the  time  of  Henry  to  the  first  coming  of 
Frederic  into  Italy  ;  implying  in  this  the  recovery  of  theii 
elective  magistracies,  their  rights  of  war  and  peace,  and  tho>e 
lucrative  privileges  which,  under  the  name  of  regalian.  had 
been  wrested  from  them  in  the  diet  of  Roncaglia.1 

This  union  of  the  Lombard  cities  was  formed  at  a  very 
favorable  juncture.  Frederic  had  almost  ever  since  his 
accession  been  engaged  in  open  hostility  with  the  see  of 
Rome,  and  was  pursuing  the  fruitless  policy  of  Henry  IV., 
who  had  endeavored  to  substitute  an  antipope  of  his  own 
faction  for  the  legitimate  pontiff.  In  the  prosecution  of  this 
scheme  he  had  besieged  Rome  with  a  great  army,  which,  the 
citizens  resisting  longer  than  he  expected,  fell  a  prey  to  the 
autumnal  pestilence  which  visits  the  neighborhood  of  that 
capital.  The  flower  of  German  nobility  was  cut  off  by  this 
calamity,  and  the  emperor  recrossed  the  Alps,  entirely  unable 
for  the  present  to  withstand  the  Lombard  confederacy.  Their 
first  overt  act  of  insurrection  was  the  rebuilding  of  Milan ; 
the  confederate  troops  all  joined  in  this  undertaking ;  and  the 
Milanese,  still  numerous,  though  dispersed  and  persecuted, 
revived  as  a  powerful  republic.  Lodi  was  compelled  to 
enter  into  the  league ;  Pavia  alone  continued  on  the  in  pe- 

1  For  the  nature  and  conditions  of  the  any  numerical  designation,  to  interpret 
Lombard  league,  besides  the  usual  au-  it  of  the  last  bearing  that  name;  as  w« 
thorities,  see  Muratori*s  48th  dissertation,  say  King  William,  for  William  the  Third 
Tb«>  ^ords,  a  tempore  Henrid  Regis  usque  And  certainly  the  liberties  of  Lombardy 
ad  .i.-roitum  imperatoris  Frederici,  leave  were  more  perfect  under  Henry  V.  than 
it  ambiguous  which  of  the  Henries  was  his  rather;  besides  which,  the  one  reign 
Intended.  Muratori  thinks  it  was  Henry  might  still  be  remembered,  and  the  other 
IV.,  because  the  cities  then  began  to  be  rested  in  tradition.  The  question,  how- 
independent.  It  seems,  however,  natu-  ever,  is  of  little  moment, 
ral.  wheu  a  king  id  mentioned  without 


362  PEACE  OF  CONSTANCE      Chap.  III.  Part  i 

rial  side.  As  a  cheek  to  Pavia,  and  to  the  marquis  of  Mont- 
ferrat,  the  most  potent  of  the  independent  nobility,  the 
Lombards  planned  the  erection  of  a  new  city  between  the 
contines  of  these  two  enemies,  in  a  rich  plain  to  the  south  of 
the  Po,  and  bestowed  upon  it,  in  compliment  to  the  Pop<', 
Alexander  III.,  the  name  of  Alessandria.  Though,  from  its 
hasty  construction,  Alessandria  was  even  in  that  age  deem- 
ed rude  in  appearance,  it  rapidly  became  a  thriving  and 
populous  city.1  The  intrinsic  energy  and  resources  of  Lorn- 
bardy  were  now  made  manifest.  Frederic,  who  had  tri- 
umphed by  their  disunion,  was  unequal  to  contend  against 
their  league.  After  several  years  of  indecisive  war  the 
emperor  invaded  the  Milanese  territory ;  but  the  confederates 
gave  him  battle,  and  gained  a  complete  victory  at  Legnano. 
Frederic  escaped  alone  and  disguised  from  the 
Legnano.  field,  with  little  hope  of  raising  a  fresh  army, 
a.d.  1176.  though  still  reluctant  from  shame  to  acquiesce  in 
the  freedom  of  Lombardy.  He  was  at  length  persuaded, 
through  the  mediation  of  the  republic  of  Venice,  to  consent 
to  a  truce  of  six  years,  the  provisional  terms  of  which  were 
all  favorable  to  the  league.  It  was  weakened,  however,  by 
the  defection  of  some  of  its  own  members ;  Cremona,  which 
had  never  cordially  united  with  her  ancient  enemies,  made 
separate  conditions  with  Frederic,  and  suffered  herself  to  be 
named  among  the  cities  on  the  imperial  side  in  the  armistice. 
Tortona  and  even  Alessandria  followed  the  same  course 
during  the  six  years  of  its  duration ;  a  fatal  testimony  of 
unsubdued  animosities,  and  omen  of  the  calamities  of  Italy. 
At  the  expiration  of  the  truce  Frederic's  anxiety  to  secure 
p  ace  of  ^ie  crown  f°r  his  son  overcame  his  pride,  and  the 
Constance,  famous  peace  of  Constance  established  the  Lom- 
a.d.  1183.       j^q  ^^1^3  m  reai  independence. 

By  the  treaty  of  Constance  the  cities  were  maintained  in 
the  enjoyment  of  all  the  regalian  rights,  whether  within  their 
walls  or  in  their  district,  which  they  could  claim  by  usage. 
Those  of  levying  war,  of  erecting  fortifications,  and  of  admin- 
istering civil  and  criminal  justice,  were  specially  mentioned. 
The  nomination  of  their  consuls,  or  other  magistrates,  was 
left  absolutely  to  the  citizens;  but   they  were  to  receive  the 

i  Alessandria  was  surnamed,  in  deri-  Oaesarea,  as  it  is  actually  called  in  tho 

»ion,  della  paglia,  from  the  thatch  with  peace  of  Constance,  being  at  that  tiuu 

which  the  houses  were  covered.     Frederic  on  the  imperial  side.     But  it  soon  recor- 

»aa  very  desirous  to  change  its  name  to  ered  its  former  appellation. 


1T4LT. 


EACE  OF  CONSTANCE.  36b 


investiture  of  their  office  from  an  imperial  legate.  The  cus- 
tomary tributes  of  provision  during  the  emperor's  residence. 
in  Italy  were  preserved ;  and  he  was  authorized  to  appoint  in 
every  city  a  judge  of  appeal  in  civil  causes.  The  Lombard 
league  was  confirmed,  and  the  cities  were  permitted  to  renew 
it  at  their  own  discretion  ;  but  they  were  to  take  every  ten 
years  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  emperor.  This  just  compact 
preserved,  along  with  every  security  for  the  liberties  and 
welfare  of  the  cities,  as  much  of  the  imperial  prerogatives  as 
could  be  exercised  by  a  foreign  sovereign  consistently  with 
the  people's  happiness.1 

The  successful  insurrection  of  Lombardy  is  a  memorable 
refutation  of  that  system  of  policy  to  which  its  advocates  give 
the  appellation  of  vigorous,  and  which  they  perpetually  hold 
forth  as  the  only  means  through  which  a  disaffected  people 
are  to  be  restrained.     By  a  certain  class  of  statesmen,  and 
by  all  men  of  harsh  and  violent  disposition,  measures  of  con- 
ciliation, adherence  to  the  spirit  of  treaties,  regard  to  ancient 
privileges,  or  to  those  rules  of  moral  justice  which  are  para- 
mount to  all  positive  right,  are  always  treated  with  derision. 
Terror  is  their  only  specific;  and  the  physical  inability  to 
rebel  their  only  security  for  allegiance.     But  if  the  razing  of 
cities,  the  abrogation  of  privileges,  the  impoverishment  and 
oppression  of  a  nation  could  assure  its  constant  submission, 
Frederic  Barbarossa  would  never  have  seen  the  militia  of 
Lombardy  arrayed  against  him  at  Legnano.     Whatever  may 
be  the  pressure  upon  a  conquered  people,  there  will  come  a 
moment   of  their  recoil.     Nor  is   it   material   to  allege,  in 
answer  to  the  present  instance,  that  the  accidental  destruction 
of  Frederic's  army  by  disease  enabled  the  cities  of  Lombardy 
to  succeed  in  their  resistance.     The  fact  may  well  be  dis- 
puted, since  Lombardy,  when  united,  appears  to  have  been 
more  than  equal   to  a  contest  with  any  German  force  that 
could  have  been  brought  against  her ;  but  even  if  we  admit 
the  effect  of  this  circumstance,  it  only  exhibits  the  preca- 
riousness  of  a  policy  which  collateral  events  are  always  liable 
to  disturb.     Providence  reserves  to  itself  various  means  by 
which  the  bonds  of  the  oppressor  may  be  broken ;  and  it  is 
not  for  human  sagacity  to  anticipate  whether  the  army  of  a 
conqueror  shall  moulder  in  the  unwholesome  marshes  of 
Rome  or  stiffen  with  frost  in  a  Russian  winter. 

i  Muratori,  Antiquitates  Italiae,  Diss   50. 


d64  AFFAIRS  OF  SICILY.         Chai    III.  Part  I 

The  peace  of  Constance  presented  a  noble  opportunity  to 
the  Lombards  of  establishing  a  permanent  federal  union  of 
small  republics  ;  a  form  of  government  congenial  from  the 
earliest  ages  to  Italy,  and  that,  perhaps,  under  which  she  is 
again  destined  one  day  to  flourish.  They  were  entitled  by 
the  provisions  of  that  treaty  to  preserve  their  league,  the 
basis  of  a  more  perfect  confederacy,  which  the  course  of 
events  would  have  emancipated  from  every  kind  of  subjec- 
tion to  Germany.1  But  dark,  long-cherished  hatreds,  and 
that  implacable  vindictiveness  which,  at  least  in  former  ages, 
distinguished  the  private  manners  of  Italy,  deformed  her 
national  character,  which  can  only  be  the  aggregate  of  in- 
dividual passions.  For  revenge  she  threw  away  the  pear1 
of  great  price,  and  sacrificed  even  the  recollection  of  that 
liberty  which  had  stalked  like  a  majestic  spirit  among  the 
ruins  of  Milan.2  It  passed  away,  that  high  disdain  of  abso- 
lute power,  that  steadiness  and  self-devotion,  which  raised  the 
half-civilized  Lombards  of  the  twelfth  century  to  the  level  of 
those  ancient  republics  from  whose  history  our  first  notions 
of  freedom  and  virtue  are  derived.  The  victim  by  turns  of 
selfish  and  sanguinary  factions,  of  petty  tyrants,  and  of 
foreign  invaders,  Italy  has  fallen  like  a  star  from  its  place  in 
heaven ;  she  has  seen  her  harvests  trodden  down  by  the 
horses  of  the  stranger,  and  the  blood  of  her  children  wasted 
in  quarrels  not  their  own :  Conquering  or  conquered,  in  the 
indignant  language  of  her  poet,  still  alike  a  slave,8  a  long 
retribution  for  the  tyranny  of  Rome. 

Frederic  did  not  attempt  to  molest  the  cities  of  Lombardy 
Affairs  of  m  the  enjoyment  of  those  privileges  conceded  by 
Sicily.  the  treaty  of  Constance.     His  ambition  was  di- 

verted to  a  new  scheme  for  aggrandizing  the  house  of  Suabia 
by  the  marriage  of  his  eldest  son  Henry  with  Constance,  the 
aunt  and  heiress  of  William  II.,  king  of  Sicily.  That  king- 
dom, which  the  first  monarch  Roger  had  elevated  to  a  high 

l  Though  there  was  no  permanent  diet  in  a  federal  constitution.  — Muratori,  Au- 

n£  the  Lombard  league,  the  consuls  and  tichita  Italiane,  t.  iii.  p.  126;  Dissert.  60; 

*odestas  of  the  respective  cities  compos-  Sisuiondi,  t.  ii.  p.  189. 

ng  it  occasionally  met  in  congress  to  de-  -  Anzi  jrirar  la  liberta  minii. 

liberate  upon  measures  of  genera]  safety.  K  baciar  lieta  ogui  ruina,  e  dire, 

Thus  assembled,  they  were  called  Recto-  Etuine  si,  ma  servitu  non  mai. 

res  Societatis  Lombardise.    It  is  evident  Gaetana  Passerini  (ossia  piutosto 

that,  if  Lombardy  had  continued  in  any  Oiovan    Battista    Pastoriui,)  in 

degree  to  preserve  the  spirit  of  union.  Mathias,   Componimenti    Lirici. 

this  congress  might  readily  have  be<   ■  vol.  iii.  p.  331. 

a  permanent  body,  like  the  Helvetic  diet,  s  Per  servir  sempre  o  vinci trice  o  vint» 

with  as  extensive  po  vers  as  are  necessary  — Filicaja 


Italy  INNOCENT  III.  365 

pitch  of  renown  and  power,  fell  into  decay  through  the 
misconduct  of  his  son  William,  surnamed  the  Bad,  and  did 
not  recover  much  of  its  lustre  under  the  second  William, 
though  styled  th3  Good.  His  death  without  issue  was 
apparently  no  remote  event;  and  Constance  was  the  sole 
legitimate  survivor  of  the  royal  family.  It  is  a  curious  cir- 
cumstance that  no  hereditary  kingdom  appears  absolutely  to 
have  excluded  females  from  its  throne,  except,  that  which 
from  its  magnitude  was  of  all  the  most  secure  from  falling 
into  the  condition  of  a  province.  The  Sicilians  felt  too 
late  the  defect  of  their  constitution,  which  permitted  an 
independent  people  to  be  transferred,  as  the  dowry  of  a 
woman,  to  a  foreign  prince,  by  whose  ministers  they  might 
justly  expect  to  be  insulted  and  oppressed.  Henry,  whose 
marriage  with  Constance  took  place  in  1186,  and  who  suc- 
ceeded in  her  right  to  the  throne  of  Sicily  three  years  after- 
wards, was  exasperated  by  a  courageous  but  unsuccessful 
effort  of  the  Norman  barons  to  preserve  the  crown  for  an 
illegitimate  branch  of  the  royal  family;  and  his  reign  is 
disgraced  by  a  series  of  atrocious  cruelties.  The  power  of 
the  house  of  Suabia  was  now  at  its  zenith  on  each  side  of  the 
Alps ;  Henry  received  the  Imperial  crown  the  year  after  his 
father's  death  in  the  third  crusade,  and  even  prevailed  upon 
the  princes  of  Germany  to  elect  his  infant  son  Frederic  as 
his  successor.  But  his  own  premature  decease  clouded  the 
prospects  of  his  family :  Constance  survived  him  but  a  year ; 
and  a  child  of  four  years  old  was  left  with  the  inheritance  of 
a  kingdom  which  his  father's  severity  had  rendered  disaf- 
fected, and  which  the  leaders  of  German  mercenaries  in  his 
service  desolated  and  disputed. 

During  the  minority  of  Frederic  II.,  from  1198  to  1216, 
the  papal  chair  was  filled  by  Innocent  III.,  a  name  innocent 
second  only,  and  hardly  second,  to  that  of  Gregory  m- 
VII.  Young,  noble,  and  intrepid,  he  united  with  the  accus- 
tomed spirit  of  ecclesiastical  usurpation,  which  no  one  had 
ever  carried  to  so  high  a  point,  the  more  worldly  ambition  of 
consolidating  a  separate  principality  for  the  Holy  See  in  the 
centre  of  Italy.  The  real  or  spurious  donations  of  Constan- 
tine,  Pepin,  Charlemagne,  and  Louis,  had  given  rise  to  a 
perpetual  claim,  on  the  part  of  the  popes,  to  very  extensive 
dominions;  but  little  of  this  had  been  effectuated,  and  in 
Rome  itself  they  were  thwarted  by  the  prefect,  an  offi?ei 


366       BEQUEST   OF  COUNTESS   MATILDA.    Chap.  III.  PAar  I 

who  swore  fidelity  to  the  emperor,  and  by  the  insubordinate 
spirit  of  the  people.  In  the  very  neighborhood  the  small 
cities  owned  no  subjection  to  the  capital,  and  were  probably 
as  much  self-governed  as  those  of  Lombardy.  One  is  trans- 
ported back  to  the  earliest  times  of  the  republic  in  reading  of 
the  desperate  wars  between  Rome  and  Tibur  or  Tusculum  ; 
neither  of  which  was  subjugated  till  the  latter  part  of  the 
twelfth  century.  At  a  further  distance  were  the  duchy  of 
Spoleto,  the  inarch  of  Ancona,  and  what  had  been  the  ex- 
archate of  Ravenna,  to  all  of  which  the  popes  had  more  or 
less  grounded  pretension-.  Early  in  the  last-mentioned  age 
the  famous  countess  Matilda,  to  whose  zealous  protection 
Gregory  VII.  had  been  eminently  indebted  during  his  long 
dispute  with  the  emperor,  granted  the  reversion  of  all  her 
possessions  to  the  Holy  See,  first  in  the  lifetime  of  Gregory, 
and  again  under  the  pontificate  of  Paschal  III.  These  were 
very  extensive,  and  held  by  different  titles.  Of  her  vast 
Be  uestof  imperial  fiefs,  Mantua,  Modena,  and  Tuscany,  she 
the  countess  certainly  could  not  dispose.  The  duchy  of  Spoleto 
Matilda.  aQ(j  marcj1  0f  Ancona  were  supposed  to  rest  upon 
a  different  footing.  I  confess  myself  not  distinctly  to  com- 
prehend the  nature  of  this  part  of  her  succession.  These 
had  been  formerly  among  the  great  fief's  of  the  kingdom  of 
Italy.  But  if  I  understand  it  rightly,  they  had  tacitly  ceased 
to  be  subject  to  the  emperors  some  years  before  they  were 
seized  by  Godfrey  of  Lorraine,  father-in-law  and  .-tep-father 
of  Matilda.  To  his  son,  her  husband,  she  succeeded  in  the 
possession  of  those  countries.  They  are  commonly  consid- 
ered as  her  alodial  or  patrimonial  property  ;  yet  it  is  not  easy 
to  see  how,  being  herself  a  subject  of  the  empire,  she  could 
transfer  even  her  alodial  estates  from  its  sovereignty.  Nor 
on  the  other  hand  can  it  apparently  be  maintained  that  she 
was  lawful  sovereign  of  countries  which  had  not  long  since 
been  imperial  fiefs,  and  the  suzerainty  ever  which  had  never 
been  renounced.  The  original  title  of  the  Holy  See,  there- 
fore, does  not  seem  incontestable  even  as  to  this  part  of  Ma- 
tilda's donation.  But  I  state  with  hesitation  a  difficulty  to 
which  the  authors  I  have  consulted  do  not  advert.1     It  is 

1  It  is  almost  hopeless  to  look  for  ex-  the  whole,  the  fairest  of  them  all,  moves 

plicit  information   upon  the  rights  and  cautiously  over  this  ground;  except  when 

pretensions  of  the  Roman  see  in   Italian  the  claim-  of  Rome  happen  to  clash  with 

writers  even  of  the  eighteenth  century,  those  <>f  'he  house  of  Este.     Rut  I  haTB 

Muratori,  the   most    learned,  and  upon  not  been    able    to  satisfy   myself  by  th« 


Italy.  ECCLESIASTICAL   STATE  REDUCED.  367 

certain,  however,  that,  the  emperors  kept  possession  of  the 
whole  during  the  twelfth  century,  and  treated  both  Spoleto 
and  Ancona  as  parts  of  the  empire,  notwithstanding  continua 
remonstrances  from  the  Roman  pontiffs.  Frederic  Barba- 
rossa,  at  the  negotiations  of  Venice  in  1177,  promised  to 
restore  the  patrimony  of  Matilda  in  fifteen  years ;  but  at  the 
close  of  that  period  Henry  VI.  was  not  disposed  to  execute 
this  arrangement,  and  granted  the  county  in  fief  to  some  of 
his  German  followers.  Upon  his  death  the  circumstances 
were  favorable  to  Innocent  III.  The  infant  king  of  Sicily 
had  been  intrusted  by  Constance  to  his  guardianship.  A 
double  election  of  Philip,  brother  of  Henry  VI.,  and  of 
Otlio  duke  of  Brunswick,  engaged  the  princes  of  Germany, 
who  had  entirely  overlooked  the  claims  of  young  Frederic, 
in  a  doubtful  civil  war.  Neither  party  was  in  a  condition  to 
enter  Italy ;  and  the  imperial  dignity  was  vacant  for  several 
years,  till,  the  death  of  Philip  removing  one  competitor,  Otho 
IV.,  whom  the  pope  had  constantly  favored,  was  crowned 
emperor.  During  this  interval  the  Italians  had  no  superior ; 
and  Innocent  availed  himself  of  it  to  maintain  the  pretensions 
of  the  see.  These  he  backed  by  the  production  of  rather  a 
questionable  document,  the  will  of  Henry  VI.,  said  to  have 
been  found  among  the  baggage  of  Marquard,  one  of  the 
German  soldiers  who  had  been  invested  with  fiefs  by  the 
late  emperor.  The  cities  of  what  we  now  call  the  Eeciesiasti- 
ecclesiastical  state  had  in  the  twelfth  century  their  cai  state  re- 
own  municipal  government  like  those  of  Lombardy ;  innocent 
but  they  were  far  less  able  to  assert  a  complete  in-  IIL 
dependence.  They  gladly,  therefore,  put  themselves  under 
the  protection  of  the  Holy  See,  which  held  out  some  prospect 
of  securing  them  from  Marquard  and  other  rapacious  parti- 
sans, without  disturbing  their  internal  regulations.  Thus  the 
duchy  of  Spoleto  and  march  of  Ancona  submitted  to  Innocent 
III. ;  but  he  was  not  strong  enough  to  keep  constant  posses- 
sion of  such  extensive  territories,  and  some  years  afterwards 
adopted  the  prudent  course  of  granting  Ancona  in  fief  to  the 
marquis  of  Este.  He  did  not,  as  may  be  supposed,  neglect 
his  authority  at  home ;  the  prefect  of  Rome  was  now  com- 
pelled to  swear  allegiance  to  the  pope,  which  put  an  end  to 

perusal  of  some  dry  and  tedious  disserta-  learning  scarcely  inferior  to  that  of  Mu- 
tions  in  St.  Blare  (Abrege  Ckronologique  ratori,  possessed  more  opportunity  and 
ie  THist.  do    I'ltalie,  t.  iv.),  who,  with     inclination  to  speak  out. 


368  LEAGUE  OF  TUSCANY.      Chap.  III.  Pakt  I. 

the  regular  imperial  supremacy  over  that  city,  and  the  privi- 
leges of  the  citizens  were  abridged.  This  is  the  proper  era 
of  that  temporal  sovereignty  which  the  bishops  of  Rome 
possess  over  their  own  city,  though  -till  prevented  by  various 
causes,  for  nearly  three  centuries,  from  becoming  unques- 
tioned and  unlimited. 

The  policy  of  Rome  was  now  more  clearly  denned  than 
ever.  In  order  to  preserve  what  she  had  thus  suddenly 
gained  rather  by  opportunity  than  strength,  it  was  her  interest 
to  enfeeble  the  imperial  power,  and  consequently  to  maintain 
League  of  the  freedom  of  the  Italian  republics.  Tuscany 
Tuscany.  had  hitherto  been  ruled  by  a  marquis  of  the  em- 
peror's appointment,  though  her  cities  were  flourishing,  and, 
within  themselves,  independent.  In  imitation  of  the  Lom- 
bard confederacy,  and  impelled  by  Innocent  III.,  they  now 
(with  the  exception  of  Pisa,  which  was  always  strongly 
attached  to  the  empire)  formed  a  similar  league  for  the 
preservation  of  their  rights.  In  this  league  the  influence 
of  the  pope  was  far  more  strongly  manifested  than  in  that 
of  Lombardy.  Although  the  latter  had  been  in  alliance 
with  Alexander  III.,  and  was  formed  during  the  height  of 
his  dispute  with  Frederic,  this  ecclesiastical  quarrel  mingled 
so  little  in  their  struggle  for  liberty  that  no  allusion  to  it  is 
found  in  the  act  of  their  confederacy.  But  the  Tuscan  union 
was  expressly  established  "  for  the  honor  and  aggrandizement 
of  the  apostolic  see."  The  members  bound  themselves  to 
defend  the  possessions  and  rights  of  the  church,  and  not  to 
acknowledge  any  king  or  emperor  without  the  approbation 
of  the  supreme  pontiff.1  The  Tuscans  accordingly  were 
more  thoroughly  attached  to  the  church  party  than  the  Lom- 
bards, whose  principle  was  animosity  towards  the  house  of 
Suabia.  Hence,  when  Innocent  III.,  some  time  after,  sup- 
ported Frederic  II.  against  the  emperor  Otho  IV.,  the  Mi- 
lanese and  their  allies  were  arranged  on  the  imperial  side ; 
but  the  Tuscans  continued  to  adhere  to  the  pope. 

In   the   wars  of   Frederic   Barbarossa  against  Milan  and 

Factions  of     *ts   a^es>   we  have   seen   the    cities   of  Lombardy 

Gueifsand      divided,  and  a  considerable  number  of  them  firmly 

attached  to  the  imperial  interest.     It  does  not  ap- 

1  Quod  possessiones  et  jura  sacrosanctae  perent,  nisi  quern  Romanus  pontifex  ap- 
scclesiae  bona  fide  defenderent ;  et  quod  probaret.  Muratori,  Dissert.  48.  (Latin, 
nullum  in  regem  aut  imperatorem  reci-     t.  iv.  p.  320;  Italian,  t.  Hi.  p.  112.) 


Itai/t.  GUELFS  AND  GHIBELINS.  "69 

pea:,  I  believe,  from  history,  though  it  is  by  no  means  im- 
probable, that  the  citizens  were  at  so  early  a  time  divided 
among  themselves,  as  to  their  line  of  public  policy,  and  that 
the  adherence  of  a  particular  city  to  the  emperor,  or  to  the 
Lombard  league,  was  only,  as  proved  afterwards  the  case, 
that  one  faction  or  another  acquired  an  ascendancy  in  its 
councils.  But  jealousies  long  existing  between  the  different 
classes,  and  only  suspended  by  the  national  struggle  which 
terminated  at  Constance,  gave  rise  to  new  modifications  of  in- 
terests, and  new  relations  towards  the  empire.  About  the 
year  1200,  or  perhaps  a  little  later,  the  two  leading  parties 
which  divided  the  cities  of  Lombardy,  and  whose  mutual  ani- 
mosity, having  no  general  subject  of  contention,  required  the 
association  of  a  name  to  dirt  ct  as  well  as  invigorate  its  preju- 
dices, became  distinguished  by  the  celebrated  appellations  of 
Guelfs  and  Ghibelins ;  the  former  adhering  to  the  papal  side, 
the  latter  to  that  of  the  emperor.  These  names  were  derived 
from  Germany,  and  had  been  the  rallying  word  of  faction  for 
more  than  half  a  century  in  that  country  before  they  were 
transported  to  a  still  more  favorable  soil.  The  Guelfs  took 
their  name  from  a  very  illustrious  family,  several  of  whom 
had  successively  been  dukes  of  Bavaria  in  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries.  The  heiress  of  the  last  of  these  inter- 
married with  a  younger  son  of  the  house  of  Este,  a  noble 
family  settled  near  Padua,  and  possessed  of  great  estates  on 
3ach  bank  of  the  lower  Po.  They  gave  birth  to  a  second 
line  of  Guelfs,  from  whom  the  royal  house  of  Brunswick  is 
descended.  The  name  of  Ghibelin  is  derived  from  a  village 
in  Franconia,  whence  Conrad  the  Salic  came,  the  progenitor, 
through  females,  of  the  Suabian  emperors.  At  the  election 
of  Lothaire  in  1125,  the  Suabian  family  were  disappointed 
of  what  they  considered  almost  an  hereditary  possession  ;  and 
at  this  time  an  hostility  appears  to  have  commenced  between 
them  and  the  house  of  Guelf,  who  were  nearly  related  to  Lo- 
thaire. Henry  the  Proud,  and  his  son  Henry  the  Lion,  rep- 
resentatives of  the  latter  family,  were  frequently  persecuted 
by  the  Suabian  emperors ;  but  their  fortunes  belong  to  the 
history  of  Germany.1  Meanwhile  the  elder  branch,  though 
not  reserved  for  such  glorious  destinies  as  the  Guelfs,  contin* 

1  The    German  origin  of   these    cele-    ination  transferred  to  Italy.     Struvius 
brated  factions  is  clearly  proved  by  a    Corpus  Hist.  German,  p.  378,  and  Mnrw 
passage  in  Otho  of  Frisingen,  who  lived     tori,  a.d.  1152. 
half  a  centurv  before  we  find  the  denom- 

VOL    I.  —  u  24 


370  OTHO  IV.  Chap.  III.  Part 

tied  to  flourish  in  Italy  ;  the  marquises  of  Este  were  T»y  far 
the  most  powerful  nobles  in  eastern  Lombardy,  and  about  the 
end  of  the  twelfth  century  began  to  be  con  id<  red  a-  tin; 
heads  of  the  church  party  in  their  neighborhood.  They  were 
frequently  chosen  to  the  office  of  podesta,  or  chief  magi  irate, 
by  the  cities  of  Romagna ;  and  in  1208  the  people  of  Fer- 
rara  set  the  fatal  example  of  sacrificing  their  freedom  for 
tranquillity,  by  electing  Azzo  VII..  marquis  of  Este,  as  their 
lord  or  sovereign.1 

Otho  IV.  was  son  of  Henry  the  Lion,  and  consequently 
head  of  the  Guelfs.  On  his  obtaining  the  imperial 
crown,  the  prejudices  of  Italian  factions  were  di- 
verted out  of  their  usual  channel.  He  was  soon  en^a^ed  in 
a  quarrel  with  the  pope,  whose  hostility  to  the  empire  was 
certain,  into  whatever  hands  it  might  fall.  In  Milan,  how- 
ever, and  generally  in  the  cities  which  had  belonged  to  the 
Lombard  league  against  Frederic  L,  hatred  of  the  house  of 
Suabia  prevailed  more  than  jealousy  of  the  imperial  prerog- 
atives ;  they  adhered  to  names  rather  than  to  principles,  and 
supported  a  Guelf  emperor  even  against  the  pope.  Terms 
of  this  description,  having  no  definite  relation  to  principles 
which  it  might  be  troublesome  to  learn  and  defend,  are  al- 
ways acceptable  to  mankind,  and  have  the  peculiar  advantage 
of  precluding  altogether  that  spirit  of  compromise  and  ac- 
commodation, by  which  it  is  sometimes  endeavored  to  ob- 
struct their  tendency  to  hate  and  injure  each  other.  From 
this  time,  every  city,  and  almost  every  citizen,  gloried  in  one 
of  these  barbarous  denominations.  In  several  cities  the  im- 
perial party  predominated  through  hatred  of  their  neighbors, 
who  espoused  that  of  the  church.  Thus  the  inveterate  feud- 
between  Pisa  and  Florence,  Modena  and  Bologna,  Cremona 
and  Milan,  threw  them  into  opposite  factions.  But  there 
was  in  every  one  of  these  a  strong  party  against  that  which 
prevailed,  and  consequently  a  Guelf  city  frequently  became 
Ghibelin,  or  conversely,  according  to  the  fluctuations  of  the 
time.2 

1  Sismor.di,  t.  ii.  p.  329  nulla  si  opero  sotto  nome  o  pretesto  delle 

2  For  the  Guelf  and  Ghibelin  factions,  fazioni  suddette.  Solamente  ritenm-rc 
besides  the  historians,  the  51st  disserta-  esse  piede  in  alcume  private  famiglie. 
tion  of  Muratori  should  be  read.  There  Antiohita  Italians,  t.  iii.  p.  148.  Hut 
is  some  degree  of  inaccuracy  in  his  Ian-  certainly  the  names  of  Guelf  and  Ghibe- 
guage,  where  he  speaks  of  these  distrac-  lin.  as  party  distinctions,  may  be  traced 
tions  expiring  at  the  beginning  of  the  all  through  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
fifteenth  century.  Quel  secolo,  e  vero,  former  faction  showed  itself  distinctly  in 
abbondo  anch'  esso  di  molte  guerre,  ma  the  insurrection  of  the  cities  subject   to 


Italy,  fredekic  n.  37] 

The  change  to  which  we  have  adverted  in  the  politics  of 
the  Guelf  party  lasted  only  during  the  reign  of  Frederic  n 
Otho  IV.  When  the  heir  of  the  house  of  Suabia 
grew  up  to  manhood,  Innocent,  who,  though  his  guardian, 
had  taken  little  care  of  his  interests,  as  long  as  ht  flattered 
himself  with  the  hope  of  finding  a  Guelf  emperor  obedient, 
placed  the  young  Frederic  at  the  head  of  an  opposition,  com- 
posed of  cities  always  attached  to  his  family,  and  of  such  as 
implicitly  followed  the  see  of  Rome.  He  met  with  consider- 
able success  both  in  Italy  and  Germany,  and  after  the  death 
of  Otho,  received  the  imperial  crown.  But  he  had  no  longer 
to  expect  any  assistance  from  the  pope  who  conferred  it.  In- 
nocent was  dead,  and  Honorius  III.,  his  successor,  could  not 
behold  without  apprehension  the  vast  power  of  Frederic,  sup- 
ported in  Lombardy  by  a  faction  which  balanced  that  of  the 
church,  and  menacing  the  ecclesiastical  territories  on  the  oth- 
er side,  by  the  possession  of  Naples  and  Sicily.  This  king- 
dom, feudatory  to  Rome,  and  long  her  firmest  ally,  was  now, 
by  a  fatal  connection  which  she  had  not  been  able  to  prevent, 
thrown  into  the  scale  of  her  most  dangerous  enemy.  Hence 
the  temporal  dominion  which  Innocent  III.  had  taken  so 
much  pains  to  establish,  became  a  very  precarious  possession, 
exposed  on  each  side  to  the  attacks  of  a  power  that  had  legit- 
imate pretensions  to  almost  every  province  composing  it. 
The  life  of  Frederic  II.  was  wasted  in  an  unceasing  conten- 
tion with  the  church,  and  with  his  Italian  subjects,  whom  she 
excited  to  rebellions  against  him.  Without  inveighing,  like 
the  popish  writers,  against  this  prince,  certainly  an  encour- 
ager  of  letters,  and  endowed  with  many  eminent  qualities, 
we  may  lay  to  his  charge  a  good  deal  of  dissimulation ;  I  will 
not  add  ambition,  because  I  am  not  aware  of  any  period  in 
the  reign  of  Frederic,  when  he  was  not  obliged  to  act  on  his 
defence  against  the  aggression  of  others.  But  if  he  had  been 
a  model  of  virtues,  such  men  as  Honorius  III.,  Gregory  IX., 
and  Innocent  IV.,  the  popes  with  whom  he  had  successively 

Milan,  upon  the  death  of  Gian  Galeazzo  Stefano  Infessura,  in  1487,  speaks  faniil 

Visconti  in   1404.     It  appeared  again  in  iarly  of  thein.     Script.  Rer.    Ital.  t.  iii. 

the  attempt  of  the  Milanese  to  reestab-  p.  1221.     And  even  in  the  conquest  of 

lish  their  republic   in   1447.      Sismondi,  Milan  by  Louis  XII.  in  1500,  the  Guelfs 

t.  is.,  p.  334.    So  in  1477,  Ludovico  Sforza  of  that  city  are  represented  as  attached 

made  use  of  Ghibelin  prejudices   to  ex-  to  the  French  party,  while  the  Ghibelins 

elude   the   regent  Bonne  of  Savoy  as  a  abetted  Ludovico  Sforza  and  Maximilian. 

Guelf.     Sismondi,   t.  xi.  p.  79.     In  the  Guicciardini,  p.  399.    Other  passages  in 

ecclesiastical  state  the  same  distinctions  the  same  historian  show  these  factions  to 

appear  to  have  been  preserved  still  later,  have  been  alive  iu  various  parts  of  Italy 


372  FREDERICK  II.  Chap.  111.  Part  I 

to  contend,  would  not  have  given  him   respite,  while  he  re- 
mained master  of  Naples,  as  well  as  the  empire1 

It  was  tlit-  custom  of  every  pope  to  urge  princes  into  a 
crusade,  which  the  condition  of  Palestine  rendered  indispen 
sable,  or,  more  properly,  desperate.  But  this  great  piece  of 
supererogatory  devotion  had  never  yet  been  raised  into  an 
absolute  duty  of  their  station,  nor  had  even  private  persons 
been  ever  required  to  take  up  the  cross  by  compulsion.  Hono- 
rius  III.,  however,  exacted  a  vow  from  Frederic,  before  he  con- 
ferred upon  him  the  imperial  crown,  that  lie  would  undertake 
a  crusade  for  the  deliverance  of  Jerusalem.  Frederic  sub- 
mitted to  this  engagement,  which  perhaps  he  never  designed 
to  keep,  and  certainly  endeavored  afterwards  to  evade. 
Though  he  became  by  marriage  nominal  king  of  Jerusalem,2 
his  excellent  understanding  was  not  captivated  with  so  barren 
a  prospect,  and  at  length  his  delays  in  the  performance  of  his 
vow  provoked  Gregory  IX.  to  issue  against  him  a  sentence 
of  excommunication.  Such  a  thunderbolt  was  not  to  be 
lightly  regarded ;  and  Frederic  -ailed,  the  next  year,  for  Pal- 
estine. But  having  disdained  to  solicit  absolution  for  what 
he  considered  as  no  crime,  the  court  of  Rome  was  excited  to 
still  fiercer  indignation  against  this  profanation  of  a  crusade 
by  an  excommunicated  sovereign.  Upon  his  arrival  in  Pal- 
estine, he  received  intelligence  that  the  papal  troops  had 
broken  into  the  kingdom  of  Naples.     No  one  could  ration 

i  The    rancor     of   bigoted     Catholics  ter  and  heiress  of  Isabella,  wife  of  Conrad 

against  Frederic  has  hardly  subsided  at  marquis    of   Montferrat.     This   Isabella 

the  present  day.     A  very  moderate  com-  was   the  youngest  daughter   of  Almaric 

mendatiou  of  him  in  Tiraboschi,  vol.  iv.  or  Amaury,  king  of  Jerusalem,  and  by 

t.  7,  was  not  suffered  to  pass  uncontra-  the  deaths  of  her  brother  Baldwin  IV.. 

dieted  by  the  Roman  editor.    And  though  of  her  eldest  sister  Sibilla,  wife  of  Guy  de 

Muratori  shows  quite  enough  prejudice  Lusignan,  and  that  sister's  child   Bald- 

against  that  emperors  character,  a  fierce  win  V.,  succeeded  to  a  claim  upon  Jeru- 

Roman  bigot,  whose  animadversions  are  salem,     which,    since    the    victories    of 

printed  in  the  17th  volume  of  his  Annals  Saladiu,  was  not  very  profitable.     It  is 

(8vo.  edition),  flies  into  paroxysms  of  fury  said   that   the   kings   of    Naples   deduce 

at  every  syllable  that  looks  like  modera-  their  title  to  that  sounding  inheritance 

tion.     It  is  well   known  that,  although  from   this   marriage   of   Frederic   (Gian- 

the  public  policy  of  Rome  has  long  dis-  none,  1.  xvi.  c.  2);  but  the  extinction  of 

played  the   pacific  temper  of  weakness,  Frederic's   posterity  must  have,  strietlj 

the  thermometer  of  ecclesiastical  senti-  speaking,  put  an  end  to  any  right  derived 

ment  in  that  city  stands  very  nearly  as  from   him;  and  Giannoue  himself  indi- 

high  as  in  the  thirteenth  century  [1810].  cates  a  better  title  by   the   cession    of 

Giaunone,  who  suffered  for  his  boldness,  Maria,  a  princess  of  Antioch,  and  legiti- 

has  drawn  Frederic  II.  very  favorably,  mate  heiress  of  Jerusalem,  to  Charles  of 

perhaps  too  favorably,  in  the  16th  and  Anjou  in   1272.     How  far,   indeed,  this 

17th  books  of  the  Istoria  Civile  di  Napoli.  may  have  been  regularly  transmitted  to 

2  The    second    wife    of   Frederic    was  the  present   king  of  Naples,   I   do   not 

[olante,  or  Violante,  daughter  of  John,  know,  and  am  sure  that  it  is  not  wortb 

:ouut  of  Brienne,  by  Maria,  eldest  daugh-  •"bile  to  inquire. 


li-ALr.  HIS   WARS   WITH  THE  LOMBARDS.  873 

ally  have  blamed  Frederic,  if  he  had  quitted  the  Holy  Land 
as  he  found  it ;  but  he  made  a  treaty  with  the  Saracens, 
which,  though  by  no  means  so  disadvantageous  as  under  all 
the  circumstances  might  have  been  expected,  served  as  a  pre- 
text for  new  calumnies  against  him  in  Europe.  The  charge 
of  irreligion,  eagerly  and  successfully  propagated,  he  repelled 
by  persecuting  edicts  against  heresy,  that  do  no  great  honor 
to  his  memory,  and  availed  him  little  at  the  time.  Over  his 
Neapolitan  dominions  he  exercised  a  rigorous  government, 
rendered  perhaps  necessary  by  the  levity  and  insubordination 
characteristic  of  the  inhabitants,  but  which  tended,  through 
the  artful  representations  of  Honorius  and  Gregory,  to  alarm 
and  alienate  the  Italian  republics. 

A  new  generation  had  risen  up  in  Lombardy  since  the 
peace  of  Constance,  and  the  prerogatives  reserved  His  warg 
by  that  treaty  to  the  empire  were  so  seldom  called  with  the 
into  action,  that  few  cities  were  disposed  to  recol-  om  ar  s' 
lect  their  existence.  They  denominated  themselves  Guelfs  of 
Ghibelins,  according  to  habit,  and  out  of  their  mutual  oppo- 
sition, but  without  much  reference  to  the  empire.  Those  how- 
ever of  the  former  party,  and  especially  Milan,  retained  their 
antipathy  to  the  house  of  Suabia.  Though  Frederic  II.  was 
entitled,  as  far  as  established  usage  can  create  a  right,  to  the 
sovereignty  of  Italy,  the  Milanese  would  never  acknowledge 
him,  nor  permit  his  coronation  at  Monza,  according  to  ancient 
ceremony,  with  the  iron  crown  of  the  Lombard  kings.  The 
pope  fomented,  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  this  disaffected 
spirit,  and  encouraged  the  Lombard  cities  to  renew  their  for- 
mer league.  This,  although  conformable  to  a  provision  in 
the  treaty  of  Constance,  was  manifestly  hostile  to  Frederic, 
and  may  be  considered  as  the  commencement  of  a  second 
contest  between  the  republican  cities  of  Lombardy  and  the 
empire.  But  there  was  a  striking  difference  between  this  and 
the  former  confederacy  against  Frederic  Barbarossa.  In  the 
league  of  1167,  almost  every  city,  forgetting  all  smaller  ani- 
mosities in  the  great  cause  of  defending  the  national  privi- 
leges, contributed  its  share  of  exertion  to  sustain  that  perilous 
conflict ;  and  this  transient  unanimity  in  a  people  so  distracted 
by  internal  faction  as  the  Lombards  is  the  surest  witness  to 
the  justice  of  their  undertaking.  Sixty  years  afterwards, 
their  war  against  the  second  Fre^ric  had  less  of  provocation 
«nd  less  of  public  spirit.     It  wa?.    i    °&vt  a  party  struggle  of 


874  ARRANGEMENT   OF          Cha*.  III.  Part.  L 

Guelf  and  Grhibelin  cities,  to  which  the  names  of  the  church 
and  the  empire  gave  more  of  dignity  and  consistence. 

The  republics  of  Italy  in  the   thirteenth  century  were  s<* 
numerous  and  independent,  and  their  revolutions  so 
mJut'of"        frequent,  that  it  is  a  difficult  matter  to  avoid  con- 
Lombard         fusion    in    following    their    history.     It   will  give 

cities.  -I 

more  arrangement  to  our  ideas,  and  at  the  same 
time  illustrate  the  changes  that  took  place  in  these  little 
states,  if  we  consider  them  as  divided  into  four  clusters  or 
constellations,  not  indeed  unconnected  one  with  another,  yet 
each  having  its  own  centre  of  motion  and  its  own  boundaries. 
The  first  of  these  we  may  suppose  formed  of  the  cities  in 
central  Lombardy,  between  the  Sessia  and  the  Adige,  the 
Alps  and  the  Ligurian  mountains ;  it  comprehends  Milan, 
Cremona,  Pavia,  Brescia,  Bergamo,  Parma,  Piacenza,  Man- 
tua, Lodi,  Alessandria,  and  several  others  less  distinguished. 
These  were  the  original  seats  of  Italian  liberty,  the  great 
movers  in  the  wars  of  the  elder  Frederic.  Milan  was  at  the 
head  of  this  cluster  of  cities,  and  her  influence  gave  an  ascen- 
dency to  the  Guelf  party ;  she  had,  since  the  treaty  of  Con- 
stance, rendered  Lodi  and  Pavia  almost  her  subjects,  and  was 
in  strict  union  with  Brescia  and  Piacenza.  Parma,  however, 
and  Cremona,  were  unshaken  defenders  of  the  empire.  In 
the  second  class  we  may  place  the  cities  of  the  march  of  Ve- 
rona, between  the  Adige  and  the  frontiers  of  Germany.  Of 
these  there  were  but  four  worth  mentioning  :  Verona,  Vicenza, 
Padua  and  Treviso.  The  citizens  of  all  the  four  were  in- 
clined to  the  Guelf  interests ;  but  a  powerful  body  of  rural 
nobility,  who  had  never  been  compelled,  like  those  upon  the 
Upper  Po,  to  quit  their  fortresses  in  the  hilly  country,  or 
reside  within  the  walls,  attached  themselves  to  the  opposite 
denomination.1  Some  of  them  obtained  very  great  authority 
in  the  civil  feuds  of  these  four  republics ;  and  especially  two 
brothers,  Eccelin  and  Alberic  da  Romano,  of  a  rich  and  dis- 
tinguished family,  known  for  its  devotion  to  the  empire.  By 
extraordinary  vigor  and  decision  of  character,  by  dissimula- 
tion and  breach  of  oaths,  by  the  intimidating  eifects  of  almost 
unparalleled  cruelty,  Eccelin  da  Romano  became  after  some 
years  the  absolute  master  of  three  cities,  Padua,  Verona, 
and  Vicenza ;    and  the   Guelf   party,  in  consequence,  was 

1  Sismoudi,  t.  ii.  p.  222. 


italt.  LOMBARD   CITIES.  375 

entirely  subverted  beyond  the  Adige,  during  the  continuance 
of  his  tyranny.1  Another  cluster  was  composed  of  the  cities 
in  Romagna ;  Bologna,  Imola,  Faenza,  Ferrara,  and  several 
others.  ^  Of  these,  Bologna  was  far  the  most  powerful,  and, 
as  no  city  was  more  steadily  for  the  interests  of  the  church, 
the  Guelfs  usually  predominated  in  this  class ;  to  which  also 
the  influence  of  the  house  of  Este  not  a  little  contributed. 
Modena,  though  not  geographically  within  the  limits  of  this 
division,  may  be  classed  along  with  it  from  her  constant  wars 
with  Bologna.  A  fourth  class  will  comprehend  the  whole 
of  Tuscany,  separated  almost  entirely  from  the  politics  of 
Lombardy  and  Romagna.  Florence  headed  the  Guelf  cities 
in  this  province,  Pisa  the  Ghibelin.  The  Tuscan  union  was 
formed,  as  has  been  said  above,  by  Innocent  III.,  and  was 
strongly  inclined  to  the  popes ;  but  gradually  the  Ghibelin 
party  acquired  its  share  of  influence ;  and  the  cities  of  Siena 
Arezzo,  and  Lucca  shifted  their  policy,  according  to  externa, 
circumstances  or  the  fluctuations  of  their  internal  factions. 
The  petty  cities  in  the  region  of  Spoleto  and  Ancona  hardly 
perhaps  deserve  the  name  of  republics ;  and  Genoa  does  not 
readily  fall  into  any  of  our  four  classes,  unless  her  wars  with 
Pisa  may  be  thought  to  connect  her  with  Tuscany.2 

After  several  years  of  transient  hostility  and  precarious 
truce,  the  Guelf  cities  of  Lombardy  engaged  in  a  regular 
and  protracted  war  with  Frederic  II.,  or  more  properly with 
their  Ghibelin  adversaries.  Few  events  of  this  contest  de- 
serve particular  notice.  Neither  party  ever  obtained  such 
decisive  advantages  as  had  alternately  belonged  to  Frederic 

1  The  cruelties  of  Eccelin  excited  uni-  country  seems  to  be  less  elucidated  by 
versal  horror  in  an  age  when  inhumanity  ancient  or  modern  writers  than  that  of 
towards  enemies  was  as  common  as  fear  other  parts  of  Italy.  It  was  at  this  time 
and  revenge  could  make  it.  It  was  an  divided  between  the  counts  of  Savoy 
usual  trick  of  beggars,  all  over  Italy,  to  and  marquises  of  Montferrat.  But  Asti, 
pretend  that  they  had  been  deprived  of  Chieri,  and  Turin,  especially  the  two 
their  eyes  or  limbs  by  the  Veronese  former,  appear  to  have  had  a  republican 
tyrant.  There  is  hardly  an  instance  in  form  of  government.  They  were,  how- 
European  history  of  so  sanguinary  a  ever,  not  absolutely  independent.  The 
government  subsisting  for  more  than  only  Piedmontese  city  that  can  properly 
twenty  years.  The  crimes  of  Eccelin  are  be  considered  as  a  separate  state,  in  the 
remarkably  well  authenticated  by  the  thirteenth  century,  was  Vercelli ;  and 
testimony  of  several  contemporary  writ-  even  there  the  bishop  seems  to  have 
ers,  who  enter  into  great  details.  Most  possessed  a  sort  of  temporal  sovereignty, 
ot  these  are  found  in  the  seventh  volume  Denina,author  of  the  Rivoluzioni  d'ltalia, 
of  Scnptores  Rerum  Italicarum.  Sis-  first  printed  in  1769,  lived  to  publish  in 
triondi,  t.  in.  p.  33,  111,  203,  is  more  full  his  old  age  a  history  of  western  Italy,  oi 
than  any  of  the  moderns.  Piedmont,  from  which  I  have  gleaned  a 

-I  have  taken  no  notice  of  Piedmont  few  facts.— Tstoria  dell'  Italia  Occidental  - 

tu    this  division.     The   history   of   that  Torino,  1809,  6  vols.  8vo 


37  6  LOMBARD  CITIES.  Chap.  III.  PARr  I 

Barbarossa  and  the  Lombard  confederacy,  during  the  war  of 
the  preceding  century.  A  defeat  of  the  Milanese  by  the 
emperor,  at  Corte  Nuova,  in  1237,  was  balanced  by  his 
unsuccessful  siege  at  Brescia  the  next  year.  The  Pi  sans 
assisted  Frederic  to  gain  a  great  naval  victory  over  the 
Genoese  fleet,  in  1241;  but  he  was  obliged  to  rise  from  the 
blockade  of  Parma,  which  had  left  the  standard  of  Ghibelin- 
ism,  in  1248.  Ultimately,  however,  the  strength  of  the 
house  of  Suabia  was  exhausted  by  so  tedious  a  struggle ;  the 
Ghibelins  of  Italy  had  their  vicissitudes  of  success  ;  but  their 
country,  and  even  themselves,  lost  more  and  more  of  the 
ancient  connection  with  Germany. 

In  this  resistance  to  Frederic  II.  the  Lombards  were  much 
indebted  to  the  constant  support  of  Gregory  IX.  and  his 
successor  Innocent  IV. ;  and  the  Guelf,  or  the  church  party, 
were  used  as  synonymous  terms.  These  pontiffs  bore  an 
unquenchable  hatred  to  the  house  of  Suabia.  No  concessions 
mitigated  their  animosity ;  no  reconciliation  was  sincere. 
Whatever  faults  may  be  imputed  to  Frederic,  it  is  impossible 
for  any  one,  not  blindly  devoted  to  the  court  of  Rome,  to 
deny  that  he  was  iniquitously  proscribed  by  her  unprincipled 
ambition.  His  real  crime  was  the  inheritance  of  his  ances- 
tors, and  the  name  of  the  house  of  Suabia.  In  1239  he 
was  excommunicated  by  Gregory  IX.  To  this  he  was  tol- 
erably accustomed  by  former  experience ;  but  the  sentence 
was  attended  by  an  absolution  of  his  subjects  from  their 
allegiance,  and  a  formal  deposition.  These  sentences  were 
not  very  effective  upon  men  of  vigorous  minds,  or  upon  those 
whose  passions  were  engaged  in  their  cause ;  but  they  influ- 
enced both  those  who  feared  the  threatenings  of  the  clergy 
and  those  who  wavered  already  as  to  their  line  of  political 
conduct.  In  the  fluctuating  state  of  Lombardy  the  excom- 
munication of  Frederic  undermined  his  interests  even  in 
cities  like  Parma,  that  had  been  friendly,  and  seemed  to 
identify  the  cause  of  his  enemies  with  that  of  religion  —  a 
prejudice  artfully  fomented  by  means  of  calumnies  propagated 
against  himself,  and  which  the  conduct  of  such  leading 
Ghibelins  as  Eccelin,  who  lived  in  an  open  defiance  of  God 
and  man,  did  not  contribute  to  lessen.  In  1240,  Gregory 
proceeded  to  publish  a  crusade  against  Frederic,  as  if  he  had 
been  an  open  enemy  to  religion ;  which  he  revenged  b) 
putting  to  death  all  the  prisoners  he   made  who  wore   the 


iTAi^r.  COUNCIL   OF  LYONS.  377 

cross.  There  was  one  thing  wanting  to  make  the  expulsion 
of  the  emperor  from  the  Christian  commonwealth  more  com- 
plete. Gregory  IX.  accordingly  projected,  and  Innocent  IV 
carried  into  effect,  the  convocation  of  a  general  council. 
This  was  held  at  Lyons,  an  imperial  city,  but  over  Councilof 
which  Frederic  could  no  longer  retain  his  suprem-  Lyons. 
acy.  In  this  assembly,  where  one  hundred  and 
forty  prelates  appeared,  the  question  whether  Frederic  ought 
to  be  deposed  was  solemnly  discussed ;  he  submitted  to  de- 
fend himself  by  his  advocates :  and  the  pope  in  the  presence, 
though  without  formally  collecting  the  suffrages  of  the  council, 
pronounced  a  sentence,  by  which  Frederic's  excommunica- 
tion was  renewed,  the  empire  and  all  his  kingdoms  taken 
away,  and  his  subjects  absolved  from  their  fidelity.  This  is 
the  most  pompous  act  of  usurpation  in  all  the  records  of  the 
church  of  Rome ;  and  the  tacit  approbration  of  a  general 
council  seemed  to  incorporate  the  pretended  right  of  deposing 
kings,  which  might  have  passed  as  a  mad  vaunt  of  Gregory 
VII.  and  his  successors,  with  the  established  faith  of  Chris- 
tendom. 

Upon  the  death  of  Frederic  II.  in  1250,  he  left  to  his  son 
Conrad  a  contest  to  maintain  for  every  part  of  his  inheritance, 
as  well  as  for  the  imperial  crown.  But  the  vigor 
of  the  house  of  Suabia  was  gone ;  Conrad  was  re- 
duced to  fight  for  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  the  only  succession 
which  he  could  hope  to  secure  against  the  troops  of  Innocent 
IV.,  who  still  pursued  his  family  with  implacable  hatred,  and 
claimed  that  kingdom  as  forfeited  to  its  feudal  superior,  the 
Holy  See.  After  Conrad's  premature  death,  which  happen- 
ed in  1254,  the  throne  was  filled  by  his  illegitimate  brother 
Manfred,  who  retained  it  by  his  bravery  and  address,  in  de- 
spite of  the  popes,  till  they  were  compelled  to  call  in  the 
assistance  of  a  more  powerful  arm. 

The  death  of  Conrad  brings  to  a  termination  that  period 
in  Italian  history  which  we  have  described  as  nearly  coex- 
tensive with  the  greatness  of  the  house  of  Suabia.  It  is 
perhaps  upon  the  whole  the  most  honorable  to  Italy :  that  in 
which  she  displayed  the  most  of  national  energy  and  patriot- 
ism. A  Florentine  or  Venetian  may  dwell  with  pleasure 
upon  later  times,  but  a  Lombard  will  cast  back  his  eye  across 
the  desert  of  centuries,  till  it  reposes  on  the  field  of  Legnauo. 
Great  changes  followed  in  the  foreign  and  internal  policy.  i« 


378      CAUSES  OF  SUCCESS  OF  LOMBAIIDY.    Chap.  III.  Pa.w  a 

the  moral  and  military  character  of  Italy.  Bat  before  we  de 
scend  to  the  next  period,  it  will  be  necessary  to  remark  some 
material  circumstances  in  that  which  has  just  passed  under 
our  review. 

The  successful  resistance  of  the  Lombard  cities  to  such 
Causes  of  the  princes  ;i-  both  the  Frederics  must  astonish  a 
success  of  reader  who  brings  to  the  story  of  these  middle 
ages  notions  derived  from  modern  times.  But 
when  we  consider  not  only  the  ineffectual  control  which 
could  be  exerted  over  a  feudal  army,  bound  only  to  a  short 
term  of  service,  and  reluctantly  kept  in  the  field  at  its  own 
cost,  but  the  peculiar  distrust  and  disaffection  with  which 
many  German  princes  regarded  the  house  of  Suabia,  less 
reason  will  appear  for  surprise.  Nor  did  the  kingdom  of 
Naples,  almost  always  in  agitation,  yield  any  material  aid  to 
the  second  Frederic.  The  main  cause,  however,  of  that 
triumph  which  attended  Lombardy  was  the  intrinsic  energy 
of  a  free  government.  From  the  eleventh  century,  when  the 
cities  became  virtually  republican,  they  put  out  those  vigor- 
ous shoots  which  are  the  growth  of  freedom  alone.  Their 
domestic  feuds,  their  mutual  wars,  the  fierce  assaults  of  their 
national  enemies,  checked  not  their  strength,  their  wealth,  or 
their  population ;  but  rather  as  the  limbs  are  nerved  by 
labor  and  hardship,  the  republics  of  Italy  grew  in  vigor  and 
courage  through  the  conflicts  they  sustained.  If  we  but  re- 
member what  savage  license  prevailed  during  the  ages  that 
preceded  their  rise,  the  rapine  of  public  robbers,  or  of  feudal 
nobles  little  differing  from  robbers,  the  contempt  of  industri- 
ous arts,  the  inadequacy  of  penal  laws  and  the  impossibility 
of  carrying  them  into  effect,  we  shall  form  some  notion  of 
the  change  which  was  wrought  in  the  condition  of  Italy  by 
thi  growth  of  its  cities.  In  comparison  with  the  blessings 
of  industry  protected,  injustice  controlled,  emulation  awak 
ened,  the  disorders  which  ruffled  their  surface  appear  slight 
and  momentary.  I  speak  only  of  this  first  stage  of  their  in- 
dependence, and  chiefly  of  the  twelfth  century,  before  those 
civil  dissensions  had  reached  their  height,  by  which  the  glory 
and  prosperity  of  Lombardy  were  soon  to  be  subverted. 

We  have  few  authentic  testimonies  as  to  the  domestic  im- 
provement of  the  i'l'vc  Italian  cities,  while  they  still  deserve 
the  name.  But  we  may  perceive  by  history  that  their  powei 
and  population,  according  to  their  extent  of  territory,  were 


Italt  LOMBARD  CITIES.  379 

almost  incredible.  In  Galvaneus  Flamma,  a  Milanese 
writei\,  we  find  a  curious  statistical  account  of  that  city  in 
1288,  which,  though  of  a  date  about  thirty  years  after  its 
liberties  had  been  overthrown  by  usurpation,  must  be  con- 
sidered as  implying  a  high  degree  of  previous  advancement, 
even  if  we  make  allowance,  as  probably  we  should,  for  some 
exaggeration.  The  inhabitants  are  reckoned  at  200,000  ;  the 
private  houses  13,000  ;  the  nobility  alone  dwelt  in  sixty 
streets ;  8,000  gentlemen  or  heavy  cavalry  (milites)  might 
be  mustered  from  the  city  and  its  district,  and  240,000  men 
capable  of  arms :  a  force  sufficient,  the  writer  observes,  to 
crush  all  the  Saracens.  There  were  in  Milan  six  hundred 
notaries,  two  hundred  physicians,  eighty  schoolmasters,  and 
fifty  transcribers  of  manuscripts.  In  the  district  were  one 
hundred  and  fifty  castles  with  adjoining  villages.  Such  was 
the  state  of  Milan,  Flamma  concludes,  in  1288  ;  it  is  not  for 
me  to  say  whether  it  has  gained  or  lost  ground  since  that 
time.1  At  this  period  the  territory  of  Milan  was  not  per- 
haps more  extensive  than  the  county  of  Surrey ;  it  was 
bounded  at  a  little  distance,  on  almost  every  side,  by  Lodi, 
or  Pavia,  or  Bergamo,  or  Como.  It  is  possible,  however, 
that  Flamma  may  have  meant  to  include  some  of  these  as 
dependencies  of  Milan,  though  not  strictly  united  with  it. 
How  flourishing  must  the  state  of  cultivation  have  been  in 
such  a  country,  which  not  only  drew  no  supplies  from  any 
foreign  land,  but  exported  part  of  her  own  produce  !  It  was 
in  the  best  age  of  their  liberties,  immediately  after  the  battle 
of  Legnano,  that  the  Milanese  commenced  the  great  canal 
which  conducts  the  waters  of  the  Tesino  to  their  capital,  a 
work  very  extraordinary  for  that  time.  During  the  same 
period  the  cities  gave  proofs  of  internal  prosperity  that  in 
many  instances  have  descended  to  our  own  observation  in 
the  solidity  and  magnificence  of  their  architecture.  Eccle- 
siastical structures  were  perhaps  more  splendid  in  Franc 
and  England ;  but  neither  country  could  pretend  to  mat  el  i 

i  Muratori,  Script.  Rerum  Italic,  t.  xi.  work  to  the  praises  of  Azzo,  asserts 
This  expression  of  Flamma  may  seem  to  therein,  that  he  had  greatly  improved 
intimate,  that  Milan  had  declined  in  his  the  beauty  and  convenience  of  the  city 
time,  which  was  about  1340.  Yet  as  though  Brescia,  Cremona,  and  otbei 
she  had  been  continually  advancing  in  places  had  declined.  Azarlus,  too,  a  wii  re- 
power,  and  had  not  yet  experienced  any  of  the  same  age,  makes  a  similar  repre 
tyrannical  government,  I  cannot  imagine  sentation.  Script.  Ker.  Ttal.  t.  xvi.  pp 
this  to  have  been  the  case;  and  the  same  314,  317.  Of  Luchino  Visconti  he  says 
Flamma,  who  is  a  great  flatterer  of  the  Statuin  Madiolani  l-eintegravit  in  tantum. 
Visconti,  and  has  dedicated  a  particular  quod  nou  civitas,  sedproviucia  videbatur 


380  LOMBARD  CITIES.  Chap.  III.  P  vrt  1 

the  palaces  and  public  buildings,  the  streets  flagged  with 
stone,  the  bridges  of  the  same  material,  or  the  commodiona 
private  houses  of  Italy.1 

The  courage  of  these  cities  was  wrought  sometimes  to  a 
tone  of  insolent  defiance  through  the  security  inspired  by 
their  means  of  defence.  From  the  time  of  the  Romans  to 
that  when  the  use  of  gunpowder  came  to  prevail,  little 
change  was  made,  or  perhaps  could  be  made,  in  that  part  of 
military  science  which  relates  to  the  attack  and  defence  of 
fortified  places.  We  find  precisely  the  same  engine-  of 
offence ;  the  cumbrous  towers,  from  which  arrows  were  shot 
at  the  besieged,  the  machines  from  which  stones  were  dis- 
charged, the  battering-rams  which  assailed  the  walls,  and 
the  basket-work  covering  (the  vinea  or  testudo  of  the  an- 
cients, and  the  gattus  or  chat-chateil  of  the  middle  ages) 
under  which  those  who  pushed  the  battering  engines  were 
protected  from  the  enemy.  On  the  other  hand,  a  city  was 
fortified  with  a  strong  wall  of  brick  or  marble,  with  towers 
raised  upon  it  at  intervals,  and  a  deep  moat  in  front.  Some- 
times the  antemural  or  barbacan  was  added ;  a  rampart  of 
less  height,  which  impeded  the  approach  of  the  hostile  en- 
gines. The  gates  were  guarded  with  a  portcullis  ;  an  inven- 
tion which,  as  well  as  the  barbacan,  was  borrowed  from  the 
Saracens.2  With  such  advantages  for  defence,  a  numerous 
and  intrepid  body  of  burghers  might  not  unreasonably  stand 
at  bay  against  a  powerful  army ;  and  as  the  consequences  of 
capture  were  most  terrible,  while  resistance  was  seldom 
hopeless,  we  cannot  wonder  at  the  desparate  bravery  of  so 
many  besieged  towns.  Indeed  it  seldom  happened  that  one 
of  considerable  size  was  taken,  except  by  famine  or  treach- 
ery. Tortona  did  not  submit  to  Frederic  Barbarossa  till  the 
besiegers  had  corrupted  with  sulphur  the  only  fountain  that 
supplied  the  citizens ;  nor  Crema  till  her  walls  were  over- 
topped by  the  battering  engines.  Ancona  held  out  a  noble 
example  of  sustaining  the  pressure  of  extreme  famine. 
Brescia  tried  all  the  resources  of  a  skilful  engineer  against 
the  second  Frederic ;  and  swerved  not  from  her  steadiness, 
when  that  prince,  imitating  an  atrocious  precedent  of  hi9 
grandfather  at  the  siege  of   Crema,  exposed  his  prisoners 

l  Sismondi,  t.  iv.  p.  176  ;  Tiraboschi,  indeed,  applicable  to  a  period  rather  latel 

t.  iv.  p.  426.     See  also  tbe  observations  than  that  of  her  free  republics. 

of  Denina  on  the  population  and  agri-  2  Muratori,  Antiquit.  Ital.  Dissert.  26 
culture  of  Italy,  1.  adv.  c.  9, 10  c.bieflv, 


Italy.  THEIR   INTERNAL   GOVERNMENT.  381 

upon  his  battering  engines  to  the  stones  that  were  hurled  by 
their  fellow-citizens  upon  the  walls.1 

Of  the  government  which  existed  in  the  republics  of  Italy 
during  the  twelfth   and  thirteenth    centuries,  no  Their 
definite  sketch  can  be  traced.     The  chroniclers  of  internal 
those  times  are  few  and  jejune ;  and,  as  is  usual  s°Ternment> 
with  contemporaries,  rather  intimate  than  describe  the  civil 
polity  of  their  respective  countries.     It  would  indeed  be  a 
weary  task,  if  it  were  even  possible,  to  delineate  the  consti- 
tutions of  thirty  or  forty  little  states  which  were  in  perpetual 
fluctuation.     The  magistrates  elected  in  almost  all  of  them, 
when  they  first  began  to  shake  off  the  jurisdiction  of  their 
count  or  bishop,  were  styled  consuls ;  a  word  very  expressive 
to  an  Italian  ear,  since,  in  the  darkest  ages,  tradition  must 
have  preserved  some  acquaintance  with  the  republican  gov- 
ernment of   Rome.2     The  consuls  were  always  annual ;  and 
their  office  comprehended  the  command  of  the  national  mili- 
tia in  war,  as  well  as  the  administration  of  justice  and  pre- 
servation of  public  order;  but  their  number  was  various; 
two,  four,  six,  or  even  twelve.     In  their  legislative  and  de- 
liberative councils  the  Lombards  still  copied  the  Roman  con- 
stitution, or  perhaps  fell  naturally  into  the  form  most  calcu- 
lated to  unite  sound  discretion  with  the  exercise  of  popular 
sovereignty.    A  council  of  trust  and  secrecy  (della  credenza) 
was  composed  of  a  small  number  of  persons,  who  took  the 
management  of  public  affairs,  and  may  be  called  the  minis- 
ters of  the  state.     But  the  decision  upon  matters  of  general 
importance,  treaties  of   alliance  or  declarations  of  war,  the 
choice  of  consuls,  or  ambassadors,  belonged  to  the  general 
council.     This  appears  not  to  have  been  uniformly  constitut- 
ed in  every  city ;  and  according  to  its  composition  the  gov- 
ernment was  more  or  less  democratical.     An  ultimate  sover- 
eignty, however,  was  reserved  to  the  mass  of  the  people ; 
and  a  parliament  or  general  assembly  was  held  to  deliberate 
on  any  change  in  the  form  of  constitution.8     ' 

About  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  a  new  and  singular 
species  of  magistracy  was  introduced  into  the  Lombard  cities. 

i  See  these  sieges  in  the  second  and  himself  publicorum  offlciorum  particeps 

third  volumes   of   Sisrnondi.      That  of  et  consilium  epistolarum  dictator.  Script 

Ancona   t.  ii.  p.  145-206,  is  told  with  re-  Rer.  Ital.  t.  v.  p.  486.     This  is,  I  believe, 

markable  elegance,  and  several  interest-  the  earliest  mention  of  those  magistrates 

mg  circumstances.  Muratori,  Annali  d'  Italia,  a.d.  1107. 

-Landulf,  the  younger,  whose  history  3  Muratori,   Dissert.   46  and  52.     Sit 

>f  Milan  extends  from  1094  to  1133,  calls  mondi,  t.  i.  p.  385 


382  LOMBARD  CITIES.  Chap   m.  Part  1 

During  the  tyranny  of  Frederic  I.  he  had  appointed  officers 
of  his  own,  called  podestas,  instead  of  the  elective  consuls. 
It  is  remarkable  that  this  memorial  of  despotic  power  should 
not  have  excited  insuperable  alarm  and  disgust  in  the  free 
republics.  But,  on  the  contrary,  they  almost  universally 5 
after  the  peace  of  Constance,  revived  an  office  which  had 
been  abrogated  when  they  first  rose  in  rebellion  against 
Frederic.  From  experience,  as  we  must  pre  nine,  of  the  par- 
tiality which  their  domestic  factions  carried  into  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice,  it  became  a  general  practice  to  elect,  by 
the  name  of  podesta,  a  citizen  of  some  neighboring  state  as 
their  general,  their  criminal  judge,  and  preserver  of  the 
peace.  The  last  duty  was  frequently  arduous,  and  requir- 
ed a  vigorous  as  well  as  an  upright  magistrate.  Offences 
against  the  laws  and  security  of  the  commonwealth  were 
during  the  middle  ages  as  often,  perhaps  more  often,  com- 
mitted by  the  rich  and  powerful  than  by  the  inferior  class 
of  society.  Rude  and  licentious  manners,  family  feuds  and 
private  revenge,  or  the  mere  insolence  of  strength,  rendered 
the  execution  of  criminal  justice  practically  and  in  every 
day's  experience,  what  is  now  little  required,  a  necessary 
protection  to  the  poor  against  oppression.  The  sentence  of 
a  magistrate  against  a  powerful  offender  was  not  pronounced 
without  danger  of  tumult;  it  was  seldom  executed  without 
force.  A  convicted  criminal  was  not,  as  at  present,  the 
stricken  deer  of  society,  whose  disgrace  his  kindred  shrink 
from  participating,  and  whose  memory  they  strive  to  forget. 
Imputing  his  sentence  to  iniquity,  or  glorying  in  an  act  which 
the  laws  of  his  fello\y-citizens,  but  not  their  sentiments,  con- 
demned, he  stood  upon  his  defence  amidst  a  circle  of  friends. 
The  law  was  to  be  enforced  not  against  an  individual,  but  a 
family  —  not  against  a  family,  but  a  faction  —  not  perhaps 
against  a  local  faction,  but  the  whole  Guelf  or  Ghibelin 
name,  which  might  become  interested  in  the  quarrel.  The 
podesta  was  to  arm  the  republic  against  her  refractory  citi- 
zen ;  his  house  was  to  be  besieged  and  razed  to  the  ground,  his 
defenders  to  be  quelled  by  violence :  and  thus  the  people, 
become  familiar  with  outrage  and  homicide  under  the  com- 
in  and  of  their  magistrates,  were  more  disposed  to  repeat 
<uch  scenes  at  the  instigation  of  their  passions.1 

1  Sismondi,  t.  iii.  p.  258;  from  whom     trated  by  Villain's  history  of  Florenc* 
-ubstance  of  these  observations   is  'a  annals  of  Genoa. 

ii 'ii« i w«d.     They  may  be  copiously  illus- 


Italy.  THEIR  DISSENSIONS  385 

The  podesta  was  sometimes  chosen  in  a  general  assembly, 
sometimes  by  a  select  number  of  citizens.  His  office  was 
annual,  though  prolonged  in  peculiar  emergencies.  He  was 
invariably  a  man  of*  noble  family,  even  in  those  cities  which 
excluded  their  own  nobility  from  any  share  in  the  govern- 
ment. He  received  a  fixed  salary,  and  was  compelled  to 
remain  in  the  city  after  the  expiration  of  his  office  for  the 
purpose  of  answering  such  charges  as  might  be  adduced 
against  his  conduct.  He  could  neither  marry  a  native  of 
the  city,  nor  have  any  relation  resident  within  the  district, 
nor  even,  so  great  was  their  jealousy,  eat  or  drink  in  the 
house  of  any  citizen.  The  authority  of  these  foreign  magis- 
trates was  not  by  any  means  alike  in  all  cities.  In  some  he 
seems  to  have  superseded  the  consuls,  and  commanded  the 
armies  in  war.  In  others,  as  Milan  and  Florence,  his  au- 
thority was  merely  judicial.  We  find  in  some  of  the  old 
annals  the  years  headed  by  the  names  of  the  podestas,  as  by 
those  of  the  consuls  in  the  history  of  Rome.1 

The  effects  of  the  evil  spirit  of  discord  that  had  so  fatally 
breathed  upon  the  republics  of  Lombardy  were  by  and  dissen- 
no  means  confined  to  national  interests,  or  to  the  sions- 
/rand  distinction  of  Guelf  and  Ghibelin.  Dissensions  glow 
ed  in  the  heart  of  every  city,  and  as  the  danger  of  foreign 
war  became  distant,  these  grew  more  fierce  and  unappeasa- 
ble. The  feudal  system  had  been  established  upon  the  prin- 
ciple of  territorial  aristocracy ;  it  maintained  the  authority, 
it  encouraged  the  pride  of  rank.  Hence,  when  the  rural 
nobility  were  compelled  to  take  up  their  residence  in  cities, 
they  preserved  the  ascendency  of  birth  and  riches.  From 
the  natural  respect  which  is  shown  to  these  advantages,  all 
offices  of  trust  and  command  were  shared  amongst  them ;  it 
is  not  material  whether  this  were  by  positive  right  or  con- 
tinual usage.  A  limited  aristocracy  of  this  description, 
where  the  inferior  citizens  possess  the  right  of  selecting 
their  magistrates  by  free  suffrage  from  a  numerous  body  of 
nobles  is  not  among  the  worst  forms  of  government,  and 
affords  no  contemptible  security  against  oppression  and  an- 
archy. This  regimen  appears  to  have  prevailed  in  most  of 
the  Lombard  cities  during  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries 
though,  in  so  great  a  deficiency  of  authentic  materials,  if 

1  Muratori,  Dissert.  46. 


384  LOMBARD  CITIES.  Chap.  III.  Pari  L 

would  be  too  peremptory  to  assert  this  as  an  unequivocal 
truth.  There  is  one  very  early  instance,  in  the  year  1041, 
of  a  civil  war  at  Milan  between  the  capitanei,  or  vassals  of 
the  empire,  and  the  plebeian  burgesses,  which  was  appeased 
by  the  mediation  of  Henry  III.  This  is  ascribed  to  the  ill 
treatment  which  the  latter  experienced  —  as  was  usual  in- 
deed in  all  parts  of  Europe,  but  which  was  endured  with 
inevitable  submission  everywhere  else.  In  this  civil  war, 
which  lasted  three  years,  the  nobility  were  obliged  to  leave 
Milan,  and  carry  on  the  contest  in  the  adjacent  plains ;  and 
one  of  their  class,  by  name  Lanzon,  whether  moved  by  am- 
bition, or  by  virtuous  indignation  against  tyranny,  put  him- 
self at  the  head  of  the  people.1 

From  this  time  we  scarcely  find  any  mention  of  dissen- 
sions among  tLd  two  orcWs  till  after  the  peace  of  Constance  — 
a  proof,  however  defective  the  contemporary  annals  may  be, 
that  such  disturbances  had  neither  been  frequent  nor  serious. 
A  schism  between  the  nobles  and  people  is  noticed  to  have 
occurred  at  Faenza  in  1185.  A  serious  civil  war  of  some 
duration  broke  out  between  them  at  Brescia  in  1200.  From 
this  time  mutual  jealousies  interrupted  the  domestic  tranquil- 
lity of  other  cities,  but  it  is  about  1220  that  they  appear  to 
have  taken  a  decided  aspect  of  civil  war ;  within  a  few  years 
of  that  epoch  the  question  of  aristocratical  or  popular  com- 
mand was  tried  by  arms  in  Milan,  Piacenza,  Modena,  Cremo- 
na, and  Bologna.2 

It  would  be  in  vain  to  enter  upon  the  merits  of  these  feuds, 
which  the  meagre  historians  of  the  time  are  seldom  much 
disposed  to  elucidate,  and  which  they  saw  with  their  own 
prejudices.  A  writer  of  the  present  age  would  show  little 
philosophy  if  he  were  to  heat  his  passions  by  the  reflection, 
as  it  were,  of  those  forgotten  animosities,  and  aggravate,  like 
a  partial  contemporary,  the  failings  of  one  or  another  faction. 
We  have  no  need  of  positive  testimony  to  acquaint  us  with 
the  general  tenor  of  their  history.  "We  know  that  a  nobility 
is  always  insolent,  that  a  populace  is  always  intemperate ;  and 
may  safely  presume  that  the  former  began,  as  the  latter  end- 
ed, by  injustice  and  abuse  of  power.  At  one  time  the  aris- 
tocracy, not  content  with  seeing  the  annual  magistrates  selected 

i  Landulfus,  Hist.  Mediolan.  iu  Script.        -  Sismondi,   t.   ii.   p.  444 ;    Aluratori. 
Reruni  Ital.  t.  iv.  p.  86;  Muratori,  Dis-    Annali  d'  Italia,  a.d.  1185,  &c. 
eert.  52;  Annali  d'  Italia,  a.d.  1041;  ~t. 
Marc,  t.  iii.  p.  94- 


iTALr.  THEIR  DISSEXSIOXS.  385 

from  their  body,  would  endeavor  by  usurpation  to  exclude 
the  bulk  of  the  citizens  from  suffrage.  At  ancther.  the  mer- 
chants, grown  proud  by  riches,  and  confident  of  their  strength, 
would  aim  at  obtaining  the  honors  of  the  state,  which  had 
been  reserved  to  the  nobility.  This  is  the  inevitable  conse- 
quence of  commercial  wealth,  and  indeed  of  freedom  and 
social  order,  which  are  the  parents  of  wealth.  There  is  in 
the  progress  of  civilization  a  term  at  which  exclusive  privi- 
leges must  be  relaxed,  or  the  possessors  must  perish  along 
with  them.  In  one  or  two  cities  a  temporary  compromise 
was  made  through  the  intervention  of  the  pope,  whereby  of- 
fices of  public  trust,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  were  di- 
vided, in  equal  proportions,  or  otherwise,  between  the  nobles 
and  the  people.  This  also  is  no  bad  expedient,  and  proved 
singularly  efficacious  in  appeasing  the  dissensions  of  ancient 
Rome. 

There  is,  however,  a  natural  preponderance  in  the  popular 
scale,  which,  in  a  fair  trial,  invariably  gains  on  that  of  the 
less  numerous  class.  The  artisans,  who  composed  the  bulk 
of  the  population,  were  arranged  in  companies  according  to 
their  occupations.  Sometimes,  as  at  Milan,  they  formed  sep- 
arate associations,  with  rules  for  their  internal  government.1 
The  clubs,  called  at  Milan  la  Motta  and  la  Credenza,  obtained 
a  degree  of  weight  not  at  all  surprising  to  those  who  consider 
the  spirit  of  mutual  attachment  which  belongs  to  such  frater- 
nities ;  and  we  shall  see  a  more  striking  instance  of  this  here- 
after in  the  republic  of  Florence.  To  so  formidable  and 
organized  a  democracy  the  nobles  opposed  their  numerous 
families,  the  generous  spirit  that  belongs  to  high  birth,  the  in- 
fluence of  wealth  and  established  name.  The  members  of 
each  distinguished  family  appear  to  have  lived  in  the  same 
street ;  their  houses  were  fortified  with-  square  massive  towers 
of  commanding  height,  and  wore  the  semblance  of  castles 
within  the  walls  of  a  city.  Brancaleon,  the  famous  senator 
of  Rome,  destroyed  one  hundred  and  forty  of  these  domestic 
entrenchments,  which  were  constantly  serving  the  purpose  of 
civil  broils  and  outrage.  Expelled,  as  frequently  happened, 
from  the  city,  it  was  in  the  power  of  the  nobles  to  avail  them- 
selves of  their  superi}rity  in  th<j  use  of  cavalry,  and  to  lay 
waste  the  district,  till  weariness  of  an  unprofitable  contention 

l  Muratori,  Dissert.  52;  Sisniondi,  t.  iii.  p.  262. 
VOL.  I    —  M.  25 


386  LOMBARD  CITIES.  Chap.  III.  Part  I 

reduced  the  citizens  to  terms  of  compromise.  But  when  al' 
these  resources  were  ineffectual,  they  were  tempted  or  forced 
to  sacrifice  the  public;  liberty  to  their  own  welfare,  and  lent 
their  aid  to  a  foreign  master  or  a  domestic  usurper. 

In  all  these  scenes  of  turbulence,  whether  the  contest  was 
between  the  nobles  and  people  or  the  Guelf  or  Ghibelin  fac- 
tions, no  mercy  was  shown  by  the  conquerors.  The  van- 
quished lost  their  homes  and  fortunes,  and,  retiring  to  other 
cities  of  their  own  party,  waited  for  the  opportunity  of  revenge. 
In  a  popular  tumult  the  houses  of  the  beaten  side  were  fre- 
quently levelled  to  the  ground  —  not  perhaps  from  a  sort  of 
senseless  fury,  which  Muratori  inveighs  against,  but  on  ac- 
count of  the  injury  which  these  fortified  houses  inflicted  upon 
the  lower  citizens.  The  most  deadly  hatred  is  that  which 
men  exasperated  by  proscription  and  forfeiture  bear  to  their 
country ;  nor  have  we  need  to  ask  any  other  cause  for  the 
calamities  of  Italy  than  the  bitterness  with  which  an  unsuc 
cessful  faction  was  thus  pursued  into  banishment.  When 
the  Ghibelins  were  returning  to  Florence,  after  a  defeat  given 
to  the  prevailing  party  in  1260,  it  was  proposed  among  them 
to  demolish  the  city  itself  which  had  cast  them  out ;  and,  but 
for  the  persuasion  of  one  man,  Farinata  degl'  Uberti,  their 
revenge  would  have  thus  extinguished  all  patriotism.1  It  is 
to  this  that  we  must  ascribe  their  proneness  to  call  in  assist- 
ance from  every  side,  and  to  invite  any  servitude  for  the  sake 
of  retaliating  upon  their  adversaries.  The  simple  love  of 
public  liberty  is  in  general,  I  fear,  too  abstract  a  passion  to 
glow  warmly  in  the  human  breast ;  and  though  often  in- 
vigorated as  well  as  determined  by  personal  animosities 
and  predilections,  is  as  frequently  extinguished  by  the  same 
cause. 

Independently  of  the*  two  leading  differences  which  embattled 
the  citizens  of  an  Italian  state,  their  form  of  government  and 
their  relation  to  the  empire,  there  were  others  more  contemp- 
tible though  not  less  mischievous.  In  every  city  the  quarrels 
of  private  families  became  the  foundation  of  general  schism, 
sedition,  and  proscription.  Sometimes  these  blended  them- 
selves with  the  grand  distinctions  of  Guelf  and  Ghibelin 

i  G.  Villani,    1.   ▼*..   c.  82.     Sismcndi.  conversation  of  the  poet  with  Farinata. 

I  cannot  forgive  Dante  for  placing  this  cant.  10,  is  very  fine,  and  illustrative  of 

patriot  tra  1'  anime  piu  nere,  in  oue  of  Florentine  history. 
the   worst  regions  of  his  Inferno.      ; 


Italy.  CTVIL  DISSENSIONS.  387 

sometimes  they  were  more  nakedly  conspicuous.  This  may 
be  illustrated  by  one  or  two  prominent  examples.  Imilda  de' 
Lambertazzi,  a  noble  young  lady  at  Bologna,  was  surprised 
by  her  brothers  in  a  secret  interview  with  Boniface  Gieremei, 
whose  family  had  long  been  separated  by  the  most  inveterate 
enmity  from  her  own.  She  had  just  time  to  escape,  while 
the  Lambertazzi  despatched  her  lover  with  their  poisoned 
daggers.  On  her  return  she  found  his  body  still  warm,  and 
a  faint  hope  suggested  the  remedy  of  sucking  the  venom 
from  his  wounds.  But  it  only  communicated  itself  to  her 
own  veins,  and  they  were  found  by  her  attendants  stretched 
lifeless  by  each  other's  side.  So  cruel  an  outrage  wrought 
the  Gieremei  to  madness ;  they  formed  alliances  with  some 
neighboring  republics ;  the  Lambertazzi  took  the  same  meas- 
ures ;  and  after  a  fight  in  the  streets  of  Bologna,  of  forty 
days'  duration,  the  latter  were  driven  out  of  the  city,  with  all 
the  Ghibelins,  their  political  associates.  Twelve  thousand 
citizens  were  condemned  to  banishment,  their  houses  razed,  and 
their  estates  confiscated.1  Florence  was  at  rest  till,  w  1215, 
the  assassination  of  an  individual  produced  a  mortal  feud 
between  the  families  Buondelmonti  and  Uberti,  in  which  all 
the  city  took  a  part.  An  outrage  committed  at  Pistoja  in 
1300  split  the  inhabitants  into  the  parties  of  Bianehi  and 
Neri ;  and  these,  spreading  to  Florence,  created  one  of  the 
most  virulent  divisions  which  annoyed  that  republic.  In  one 
of  the  changes  which  attended  this  little  ramification  of  fac- 
tion, Florence  expelled  a  young  citizen  who  had  borne  of- 
fices of  magistracy,  and  espoused  the  cause  of  the  Bian- 
ehi. Dante  Alighieri  retired  to  the  courts  of  some  Ghibelin 
princes,  where  his  sublime  and  inventive  mind,  in  the 
gloom  of  exile,  completed  that  original  combination  of  vast 
and  extravagant  conceptions  with  keen  political  satire,  which 
has  given  immortality  to  his  name,  and  even  lustre  to  the 
petty  contests  of  his  time.2 

In  the  earlier  stages  of  the  Lombard  republics  their  differ- 
ences, as  well  mutual  as  domestic,  had  been  frequently  ap- 
peased by  the  mediation  of  the  emperors  ;  and  the  loss  of 
this  salutary  influence  may  be   considered  as  no  slight  evil 


i  Sismondi,  t.  iii.  p.  442.    This  story  2  Dino  Compagni,  in  Scr.  Rer.  Ital.  t 

inay  suggest  that  of  Romeo  and  Juliet,  ix. ;  Villani,  1st.  Fiorent,  1.  viii. ;  Dante 

tself  founded  upon  an  Italian  novel,  and  passim 
not  an  unnatural  picture  of  manners 


388  GIOVANNI  DI  V1CENZA.     Chai-.  III.  Yakt  I 

attached  to  that  absolute  emancipation  which  Italy  attained 
in  the  thirteenth  century.  The  popes  sometimes  endeavored 
to  interpose  an  authority  which,  though  not  quite  so  direct, 
was  held  in  greater  veneration  ;  and  if  their  own  tempers 
had  been  always  pure  from  the  selfish  and  vindictive  pas- 
sions of  those  whom  they  influenced,  might  have  produced 
more  general  and  permanent  go^d.  But  they  considered  the 
Ghibelins  as  their  own  peculiar  enemies,  and  the  triumph  of 
the  opposite  faction  as  the  church's  best  security.  Gregory 
X.  and  Nicholas  III.,  whether  from  benevolent  motives,  or 
because  their  jealousy  of  Charles  of  Anjou,  while  at  the 
head  of  the  Guelfs,  suggested  the  revival  of  a  Ghibelin 
party  as  a  counterpoise  to  his  power,  distinguished  their  pon- 
tificate by  enforcing  measures  of  reconciliation  in  all  Italian 
cities ;  but  their  successors  returned  to  the  ancient  policy  and 
prejudices  of  Rome. 

The  singular  history  of  an  individual  far  less  elevated  in 
Giovanni  di  station  than  popes  or  emperors,  Fra  Giovanni  di 
vicenza.  -•  Vicenza,  belongs  to  these  times  and  to  this  subject. 
This  Dominican  friar  began  his  career  at  Bologna  in  1233, 
preaching  the  cessation  of  war  and  forgiveness  of  injuries. 
He  repaired  from  thence  to  Padua,  to  Yerona,  and  the  neigh- 
boring cities.  At  his  command  men  laid  down  their  in- 
struments  of  war,  and  embraced  their  enemies.  With  that 
susceptibility  of  transient  impulse  natural  to  popular  govern- 
ments, several  republics  implored  him  to  reform  their  laws 
and  to  settle  their  differences.  A  general  meeting  was  sum- 
moned in  the  plain  of  Paquara,  upon  the  banks  of  the  Adige. 
The  Lombards  poured  themselves  forth  from  Romagna  and 
the  cities  of  the  March ;  Guelfs  and  Ghibelins,  nobles  and 
burghers,  free  citizens  and  tenantry  of  feudal  lords,  mar- 
shalled around  their  carroccios,  caught  from  the  lips  of  the 
preacher  the  allusive  promise  of  universal  peace.  They 
submitted  to  agreements  dictated  by  Fra  Giovanni,  which 
contain  little  else  than  a  mutual  amnesty ;  whether  it  were 
that  their  quarrels  had  been  really  without  object,  or  that  he 
had  dexterously  avoided  to  determine  the  real  points  of  con- 
tention. But  power  and  reputation  suddenly  acquired  are 
transitory.  Not  satisfied  with  being  the  legislator  and  arbi- 
ter of  Italian  cities,  he  aimed  al  becoming  their  master,  and 
abused  the  enthusiasm  of  Vicenza  and  Verona  to  obtain  a 
grant  of  absolute  sovereignty.      Changed  from  an  apostle  U: 


fTAiY  GIOVANXI  DI  VICMZA  ofci» 

an  usurper,  the  fate  of  Fra  Giovanni  might  be  predicted ; 
and  he  speedily  gave  place  to  those  who,  though  they  made 
a  worse  use  of  their  power,  had,  in  the  eyes  of  mankind, 
more  natural  pretensions  to  possess  it.1 

i  Tiratoechi,  Storia  della  Letteralrujra.  t.    t   i    214  (a  Tery  well-written  aeeoont} 
BiemoDdi.  t.  ii.  p.  484 


390  STATE  OF   ITALY  Chap.  III.  Part  fl 


PART   II. 

State  of  Italy  after  the  Extinction  of  the  House  of  Suabia —  Conquest  cf  Maple* 
by  Charles  of  Anjou —  The  Lombard  Republics  become  severally  subject  to  Prince* 
or  Usurpers  —  The  Visconti  of  Milan  —  Their  Aggrandizement — Decline  of  the 
Imperial  Authority  over  Italy  —  Internal  State  of  Rome — Rienzi —  Florence  — 
her  Forms  of  Government  historically  traced  to  the  End  of  the  Fourteenth  Cen- 
tury—  Conquest  of  Pisa  —  Pisa  —  its  Commerce,  Naval  Wars  with  Genoa,  and 
Decay  —  Genoa  —  her  Contentions  with  Venice  —  War  of  Chioggio  —  Government  of 
Genoa — Venice  — her  Origin  and  Prosperity  —  Venetian  Government  —  its  Vices  — 
Territorial  Conquests  of  Venice — Military  System  of  Italy  —  Companies  of  Adven- 
ture—  1,  foreign;  Guarnieri,  Hawk  wood  —  and  2,  native;  Braccio,  Sforza  —  Im- 
provements in  Military  Service  —  Arms,  offensive  and  defensive  —  Invention  of 
Gunpowder  —  Naples  —  First  Line  of  Anjou  —  Joanna  I. — Ladislaus  —  Joanna  II. 
—  Francis  Sforza  becomes  Duke  of  Milan  —  Alfonzo  King  of  Naples  —  State  of  Italy 
luring  the  Fifteenth  Century  —  Florence  —  Rise  of  the  Medici,  and  Ruin  of  theii 
Adversaries  —  Pretensions  of  Charles  VIII.  to  Naples. 

From  the  death  of  Frederic  II.  in  1250,  to  the  invasion 
of  Charles  VIII.  in  1494,  a  long  and  undistinguished  period 
occurs,  which  it  is  impossible  to  break  into  any  natural  divi- 
sions. It  is  an  age  in  many  respects  highly  brilliant :  the 
age  of  poetry  and  letters,  of  art,  and  of  continual  improve- 
ment. Italy  displayed  an  intellectual  superiority  in  this 
period  over  the  Transalpine  nations  which  certainly  had  not 
appeared  since  the  destruction  of  the  Roman  empire.  But 
her  political  history  presents  a  labyrinth  of  petty  facts  so 
obscure  and  of  so  little  influence  as  not  to  arrest  the  atten- 
tion, so  intricate  and  incapable  of  classification  as  to  leave 
only  confusion  in  the  memory.  The  general  events  that  are 
worthy  of  notice,  and  give  a  character  to  this  long  period, 
are  the  establishment  of  small  tyrannies  upon  the  ruins  of 
republican  governm*ent  in  most  of  the  cities,  the  gradual  rise 
of  three  considerable  states,  Milan,  Florence,  and  Venice, 
the  naval  and  commercial  rivalry  between  the  last  city  and 
Genoa,  the  final  acquisition  by  the  popes  of  their  present 
territorial  sovereignty,  and  the  revolutions  in  the  kingdom  of 
Naples  under  the  lines  of  Anjou  and  Aragon. 

After  the  death  of  Frederic  II.  the  distinctions  of  Guelf 
and  Ghibelin  became  destitute  of  all  rational  meaning.  The 
most  odious  crimes  were  constantly  perpetrated,  and  the  ut- 
most miseries  endured,  for  an  echo  and  a  i  hade  that  mocked 


rrAi.v.  AFFAIRS   OF  NAPLES.  391 

the  leluded  enthusiasts  of  faction.  None  of  the  Guelfs  de- 
nied the  nominal  but  indefinite  sovereignty  of  the  empire 
and  beyond  a  name  the  Ghibelins  themselves  would  have 
been  little  disposed  to  carry  it.  But  the  virulent  hatreds  at- 
tached to  these  words  grew  continually  more  implacable,  till 
ages  of  ignominy  and  tyrannical  government  had  extin- 
guished every  energetic  passion  in  the  bosoms  of  a  degraded 
people. 

In  the  fall  of  the  house  of  Suabia,  Rome  appeared  to  have 
consummated  her  triumph ;  and  although  the  Ghibelin  party 
was  for  a  little  time  able  to  maintain  itself,  and  even  to  gain 
ground,  in  the  north  of  Italy,  yet  two  events  that  occurred 
not  long  afterwards  restored  the  ascendency  of  their  adver- 
saries.   The  first  of  these  was  the  fall  of  Eccelin  da  Romano, 
whose  rapid  successes  in  Lombardy  appeared  to    d  ^^ 
threaten  the  establishment  of  a  tremendous  despot- 
ism, and  induced  a  temporary  union  of  Guelf  and  Ghibelin 
states,  by  which  he  was  overthrown.    The  next  and  far  more 
important  was  the  change  of  dynasty  in  Naples.  Affairs  of 
This  kingdom  had  been  occupied,  after  the  death  NaPles 
of  Conrad,  by  his  illegitimate  brother,  Manfred,  in  the  be- 
half, as  he  at  first  pretended,  of  young  Conradin 

;       .        ,  s.        L  ,    .  J  ....  TT       A. D.  1254. 

the  heir,  but  in  iac'.  as  his  own  acquisition,     lie 
was  a  prince  of  an  active  and  firm  mind,  well  fitted  for  his 
difficult  post,  to  whom  the  Ghibelins  looked  up  as  their  head, 
and  as  the  representative  of  his  father.    It  was  a  natural  ob- 
ject with  the  popes,  independently  of  their  ill-will  towards 
a  son  of  Frederic  II.,  to  see  a  sovereign  on  whom  they  could 
better  rely  placed  upon  so  neighboring  a  throne.  Charles  of 
Charles  count  of  Anjou.  brother  of  St.  Louis,  was  Al,jou' 
tempted  by  them  to  lead  a  crusade  (for  as  such  all  wars  for 
the   interest  of   Rome    were   now  considered)   against   the 
Neapolitan  usurper.     The  chance  of  a  battle  de-  ^     12g6 
cided  the  fate  of  Naples,  and  had  a  striking  in- 
fluence upon  the  history  of  Europe  for  several  centuries. 
Manfred  was  killed  in  the  field  :    but  there  remained  the 
legitimate  heir  of  the  Frederics,  a  boy  of  seventeen  years 
old,  Conradin,  son  of  Conrad,  who  rashly,  as  we  say  at  least 
after  the  event,  attempted  to  regain  his  inheritance.    He  fell 
into  the  hands  of  Charles  ;  and  the  voice  of  those  rude  ages, 
as  well  as  of  a  more  enlightened  posterity,  has  united  in  brand- 
ing with  everlasting  infamy  the  name  of  that  prince,  who 


392  DECLINE  OF   THE  GHIBELINS.    Chap.  III.  Part  H 

a  d  1268  °^  no*  ^ies'ta^e  to  purchase  the  security  of  hi? 
own  title  by  the  public  execution  of  an  honorable 
competitor,  or  rather  a  rightful  claimant  of  the  throne  he 
had  usurped.  With  Conradin  the  house  of  Suabia  was  ex- 
tinguished; but  Constance  the  daughter  of  Manfred  had 
transported  his  right  to  Sicily  and  Naples  into  the  hcuse  of 
Aragon,  by  her  marriage  with  Peter  III. 

This  success  of  a  monarch  selected  by  the  Roman  pontiffs 
Decline  of  as  their  particular  champion,  turned  the  tide  of 
theGhibelin  faction  over  all  Italy.  He  expelled  the  Ghibelins 
par  y'  from  Florence,  of  which   they  had  a  few  years 

before  obtained  a  complete  command  by  means  of  their 
memorable  victory  upon  the  river  Arbia.  After  the  fall  of 
Conradin  that  party  was  everywhere  discouraged.  Germany 
held  out  small  hopes  of  support,  even  when  the  imperial 
throne,  which  had  long  been  vacant,  should  be  filled  by  one 
of  her  princes.  The  populace  were  in  almost  every  city 
attached  to  the  church  and  to  the  name  of  Guelf ;  the  kings 
of  Naples  employed  their  arms,  and  the  popes  their  excom- 
munications ;  so  that  for  the  remainder  of  the  thirteenth  cen 
tury  the  name  of  Ghibelin  was  a  term  of  proscription  in  the 
majority  of  Lombard  and  Tuscan  republics.  Charles  was 
constituted  by  the  pope  vicar-general  in  Tuscany.  This  was 
a  new  pretension  of  the  Roman  pontiffs,  to  name  the  lieuten- 
ants of  the  empire  during  its  vacancy,  which  indeed  could 
not  be  completely  filled  up  without  their  consent.  It  soon, 
however,  became  evident  that  he  aimed  at  the  sovereignty  of 
Italy.  Some  of  the  popes  themselves,  Gregory  X.  and  Nich- 
olas IV.,  grew  jealous  of  their  own  creature.  At  the  congress 
of  Cremona,  in  1269,  it  was  proposed  to  confer  upon  Charles 
the  seigniory  of  all  the  Guelf  cities;  but  the  greater  part 
were  prudent  enough  to  choose  him  rather  as  a  friend  than  a 
master.1 

The  Lom-  The  cities  of  Lombardy,  however,  of  either  de- 

bard  cities      nomination,  were    no   longer   influenced   by  that 

become  sub-  '         ,  °  .        .J 

ject  to  lords,  generous  disdain  ot  one  man  s  will  which  is  to  re- 

l  Sismondi,  t.  iii.  p.  417.     Several,  how-  empire,  and  either  to  acquire  that  title 

ever,  including  Milan,  took  an  oatn  of  himself,  or  at  least  to  stand  in  the  same 

fidelity  to  Charles  the  .same  year.     Ibid,  relation  as  the  emperors  had  done  to  the 

In  1273  he  was  lord  of  Alessandria  and  Italian  states;    which,  according  to  the 

Piacenza,  and  received  tribute  from  Mi-  usage  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  cen- 

lan,  Bologna,  and  most  Lombard  cities,  turies,  left  them  in  possession  of  every- 

Muratori.     It  was  evidently  his  intention  thing   that    wo   call   independence,  witb 

to  avail  himself  of  the  vacancy  of  the  the  reservation  of  a  nominal  allegiance 


italy.  SUBJECTION   OF   LOMBARD   CITIES.  393 

publican  governments  what  chastity  is  to  women  —  a  conser- 
vative piinciple,  never  to  be  reasoned  upon,  or  subjected  to 
calculations  of  utility.  By  force,  or  stratagem,  or  free  con- 
sent,  almost  all  the  Lombard  republics  had  already  fallen  un- 
der the  yoke  of  some  leading  citizen,  who  became  the  lord 
(signore)  or,  in  the  German  sense,  tyrant  of  his  country. 
The  first  instance  of  a  voluntary  delegation  of  sovereignty 
was  that  above  mentioned  of  Ferrara,  which  placed  itself 
under  the  lord  of  Este.  Eccelin  made  himself  truly  the 
tyrant  of  the  cities  beyond  the  Adige ;  and  such  experience 
ought  naturally  to  have  inspired  the  Italians  with  more 
universal  abhorrence  of  despotism.  But  every  danger  ap- 
peared trivial  in  the  eyes  of  exasperated  factions  when 
compared  with  the  ascendency  of  their  adversaries.  Weary 
of  unceasing  and  useless  contests,  in  which  ruin  fell  with  an 
alternate  but  equal  hand  upon  either  party,  liberty  withdrew 
from  a  people  who  disgraced  her  name ;  and  the  tumultuous, 
the  brave,  the  intractable  Lombards  became  eager  to  submit 
themselves  to  a  master,  and  patient  under  the  heaviest 
oppression.  Or,  if  tyranny  sometimes  overstepped  the  limits 
of  forbearance,  and  a  seditious  rising  expelled  the  reigning 
prince,  it  was  only  to  produce  a  change  of  hands,  and  transfer 
the  impotent  people  to  a  different,  and  perhaps  a  worse,  des- 
potism.1 In  many  cities  not  a  conspiracy  was  planned,  not  a 
sigh  was  breathed,  in  favor  of  republican  government,  after 
once  they  had  passed  under  the  sway  of  a  single  person. 
The  progress  indeed  was  gradual,  though  sure,  from  limited 
to  absolute,  from  temporary  to  hereditary  power,  from  a  just 
and  conciliating  rule  to  extortion  and  cruelty.  But  before 
the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  at  the  latest,  all  those 
cities  which  had  spurned  at  the  faintest  mark  of  submission 
to  the  emperors  lost  even  the  recollection  of  self-government, 
and  were  bequeathed,  like  an  undoubted  patrimony,  among 
the  children  of  their  new  lords.  Such  is  the  progress  of 
usurpation ;  and  such  the  vengeance  that  Heaven  reserves 

1  See  an  instance  of   the  manner  in  the  spot,  put  his  son  to  death  in  cold 

which  one  tyrant  was  exchanged  for  an-  blood,  e  poi  si  fece  signore  della  terra, 

other,  in  the  fate  of  Passerino  Bonaccorsi,  Villani,  1.  x.  c.  99,  observes,  like  a  good 

lord  of  Mantua,  in  1328.     Luigi  di  Gon-  republican,  that  God  had  fulfilled  in  this 

saga  surprised  him,  rode  the  city  (corse  the  words  of  his  Gospel  (query,   what 

la  citta)  with  a  troop  of  horse,  crying,  Gospe  ?l,  I  will  slav  my  enemy  by  my 

Viva  il  popolo,  e  muoja  Messer  Passerino  enemy  -  abbattend«      uno   tirauuo  pel 

«  le  sue  gabelle'  killed  Passerino  upon  l'altre 


394  THE  TORRIANI  AND  VISCONTI.    Chap.  III.  Paw  U 

for  those  wlio  waste  in  license  and  faction  its  first  of  social 
blessings,  liberty.1 

The  city  most  distinguished  in  both  wars  against  the  house 
The  of  Suabia,  for   an    unconquerable  attachment  to 

and'vis-  republican  institutions,  was  the  first  to  sacrifice 
contiat  them  in  a  few  years  after  the  death  of  Frederic 

Milan.  jj^     Milan  had  for  a  considerable  time  been  agi- 

tated by  civil  dissensions  between  the  nobility  and  inferior 
citizens.  These  parlies  were  pretty  equally  balanced,  and 
their  success  was  consequently  alternate.  Each  had  its  own 
podesta,  as  a  party-leader,  distinct  from  the  legitimate  magis- 
trate of  the  city.  At  the  head  of  the  nobility  was  their  arch- 
bishop, Fra  Leon  Perego ;  the  people  chose  Martin  della 
Torre,  one  of  a  noble  family  which  had  ambitiously  ,-ided 
with  the  democratic  faction.  In  consequence  of  the  crime  of 
a  nobleman,  who  had  murdered  one  of  his  creditors,  the  two 
parties  took  up  arms  in  1257.  A  civil  war,  of  various  suc- 
cess, and  interrupted  by  several  pacifications,  which  in  that 
unhappy  temper  could  not  be  durable,  was  terminated  in 
about  two  years  by  the  entire  discomfiture  of  the  aristocracy, 
and  by  the  election  of  Martin  della  Torre  as  chief  and  lord 
(capitano  e  signore)  of  the  people.  Though  the  Milanese 
did  not  probably  intend  to  renounce  the  sovereignty  resident 
in  their  general  assemblies,  yet  they  soon  lost  the  republican 
spirit ;  five  in  succession  of  the  family  della  Torre  might  be 
said  to  reign  in  Milan  ;  each,  indeed,  by  a  formal  election, 
but  with  an  implied  recognition  of  a  sort  of  hereditary  title. 
Twenty  years  afterwards  the  Visconti,  a  family  of  opposite 
interests,  supplanted  the  Torriani  at  Milan  ;  and  the  rivalry 
between  these  great  houses  was  not  at  an  end  till  the  final 
establishment  of  Matteo  Visconti  in  1313;  but  the  people 
were  not  otherwise  considered  than  as  aiding  by  force  the  one 
or  other  party,  and  at  most  deciding  between  the  pretensions 
of  their  masters. 

The  vigor  and  concert  infused  into  the  Guelf  party  by  the 

1  See  the  observations  of  Sisraondi,  t.  people  was  consulted  upon  several  occa 

Iv.  p.  212,  on  the  conduct  of  the  Lorn-  sions.     At  Milan  there  was  a  council  ol 

bard  signori  (I  know  not  of  any  English  900  nobles,  not  permanent  or  represent- 

word    that    characterizes    them,    except  ative,  but  selected  and  convened  at  th« 

tyrant  in  its  primitive  sense)  during  the  discretion  of  the  government,  throughout 

first    period    of  their    dominion.    They  the  reigns  of  the  Visconti.    Corio,  p.  519. 

were  generally  chosen  in  an  assembly  of  583.     Thus,  as  Sismondi  remarks,   the} 

the  people,  sometimes  for  a  short  term,  respected  the  sovereignty  of  the  people 

rolonged  in  the    same    manner.     The  while  the}  destroyed  its  liberty. 


Italt.  REVIVAL  OF  THE  GHIBELINS.  393 

successes  of  Charles  of  Anjou,  was  not  very  dura-  Revival  of 
ble.  That  prince  was  soon  involved  in  a  protracted  ^  Gbibe- 
and  unfortunate  quarrel  with  the  kings  of  Aragon,  m  par  y' 
to  whose  protection  his  revolted  subjects  in  Italy  had  recurred. 
On  the  other  hand,  several  men  of  energetic  character  retrieved 
the  Ghibelin  interests  in  Lombardy,  and  even  in  the  Tuscan 
cities.  The  Visconti  were  acknowledged  heads  of  that  faction. 
A  family  early  established  as  lords  of  Verona,  the  della  Scala, 
maintained  the  credit  of  the  same  denomination  between  the 
Adige  and  the  Adriatic.  Castruccio  Castrucani,  an  adven- 
turer of  remarkable  ability,  rendered  himself  prince  of  Lucca, 
and  drew  over  a  formidable  accession  to  the  imperial  side 
from  the  heart  of  the  church-party  in  Tuscany,  though  his 
death  restored  the  ancient  order  of  things.  The  inferior 
tyrants  were  partly  Guelf,  partly  Ghibelin,  according  to  local 
revolutions ;  but  upon  the  whole  the  latter  acquired  a  gradual 
ascendency.  Those  indeed  who  cared  for  the  independence 
of  Italy,  or  for  their  own  power,  had  far  less  to  fear  from  the 
phantom  of  imperial  prerogatives,  long  intermitted  and  inca- 
pable of  being  enforced,  than  from  the  new  race  of  foreign 
princes  whom  the  church  had  substituted  for  the 
house  of  Suabia.  The  Angevin  kings  of  Naples  Napfes°aim 
were  sovereigns  of  Provence,  and  from  thence  a*  command 
easily  encroached  upon  Piedmont,  and  threatened 
the  Milanese.  Robert,  the  third  of  this  line,  almost  openly 
aspired,  like  his  grandfather  Charles  I.,  to  a  real  sovereignty 
over  Italy.  His  offers  of  assistance  to  Guelf  cities  in  war 
were  always  coupled  with  a  demand  of  the  sovereignty. 
Many  yielded  to  his  ambition  ;  and  even  Florence  twice 
bestowed  upon  him  a  temporary  dictatorship.  In  1314  he 
was  acknowledged  lord  of  Lucca,  Florence,  Pavia,  Alessan- 
dria, Bergamo,  and  the  cities  of  Romagna.  In  1318  the 
Guelfs  of  Genoa  found  no  other  resource  against  the  Ghibe- 
lin  emigrants  who  were  under  their  walls  than  to  resign  their 
liberties  to  the  king  of  Naples  for  the  term  of  ten  years, 
which  he  procured  to  be  renewed  for  six  more.  The  Avignon 
popes,  especially  John  XXII.,  out  of  blind  hatred  to  the  em- 
peror Louis  of  Bavaria  and  the  Visconti  family,  abetted  all 
these  measures  of  ambition.  But  they  were  rendered  abor- 
tive by  Robert's  death  and  th(  subsequent  disturbances  of  his 
kingdom. 

At  the  latter  end   of   the   thirteenth  et  ntury  there  were 


396  STATE  OF   LOMBARDY.     Chai\  III.  Pabt  U 

almost  as  man}-  princes  in  the  north  of  Italy  as  there  had 
been  free  cities  in  the  preceding  age.  Their  equality,  and 
the  frequent  domestic  revolutions  which  made  their  seat  un- 
steady, kept  them  for  a  while  from  encroaching  on  each  other. 
Gradually,  however,  they  became  less  numerous:  a  quantity 
of  obscure  tyrants  were  swept  away  from  the  smaller  cities  ; 
and  the  people,  careless  or  hopeless  of  liberty,  were  glad  to 
exchange  the  rule  of  despicable  petty  usurpers  for 
Lombardy  that  of  more  distinguished  and  powerful  families. 
rfthemiddle  About  the  year  1350  the  central  parts  of  Lombar- 
fourteenth  cly  had  fallen  under  the  dominion  of  the  Visconti. 
century.  jpour  other  houses  occupied  the  second  rank  ;  that 
of  Este  at  Ferrara  and  Modena ;  of  Scala  at  Verona,  which 
under  Cane  and  Mastino  della  Scala  had  seemed  likely  to 
contest  with  the  lords  of  Milan  the  supremacy  over  Lombar- 
dy ;  of  Carrara  at  Padua,  which  later  than  any  Lombard 
city  had  resigned  her  liberty  ;  and  of  Gonzaga  at  Mantua, 
which,  without  ever  obtaining  any  material  extension  of  terri- 
tory, continued,  probably  for  that  reason,  to  reign  undis- 
Powerofthe  turbed  till  the  eighteenth  century.  But  these 
Visconti.  united  were  hardly  a  match,  as  they  sometimes 
experienced,  for  the  Visconti.  That  family,  the  object  of 
every  league  formed  in  Italy  for  more  than  fifty  years,  in  con- 
stant hostility  to  the  church,  and  well  inured  to  interdicts  and 
excommunications,  producing  no  one  man  of  military  talents, 
but  fertile  of  tyrants  detested  for  their  perfidiousness  and 
cruelty,  was  nevertheless  enabled,  with  almost  uninterrupted 
success,  to  add  city  after  city  to  the  dominion  of  Milan  till  it 
absorbed  all  the  north  of  Italy.  Under  Gian  Galeazzo,  whose 
reign  began  in  1385,  the  viper  (their  armorial  bearing)  as- 
sumed indeed  a  menacing  attitude : 1  he  overturned  the  great 
family  of  Scala,  and  annexed  their  extensive  possessions  to  his 
own  ;  no  power  intervened  from  Vercelli  in  Piedmont  to  Fel- 
tre  and  Belluno  ;  while  the  free  cities  of  Tuscany,  Pisa,  Siena, 
Perugia,  and  even  Bologna,  as  if  by  a  kind  of  witchcraft, 
voluntarily  called  in  a  dissembling  tyrant  as  their  master. 

Powerful  as  the  Visconti  were  in  Italy,  they  were  long  in 
washing  out  the  tinge  of  recent  usurpation,  which  humbled 
them  before  the  legitimate  dynasties  of  Europe.     At  the  siege 

i  Allusions  to  heraldry  are  very  com-    bitually  use  the  viper,  il  biscione  as  a 
inon  in  the  Italian  writers.     All  the  his-    synonym  for  the  power  of  Milan, 
torians    of   the  fourteenth   century  ha- 


Italy.  RELATIONS  WITH  THE  EMPIRE.  397 

of  Genoa  in  1318  Robert  king  of  Naples  rejected  with  con- 
tempt the  challenge  of  Marco  Visconti  to  decide  their  quar- 
rel in  single  combat.1  But  the  pride  of  sovereigns,  like  that 
of  private  men,  is  easily  set  aside  for  their  interest.  Gale- 
azzo  Visconti  purchased  with  100,000  florins  a  daughter  of 
France  fur  his  son,  which  the  French  historians  mention  a<  a 
deplorable  humiliation  for  their  crown.  A  few  years  after- 
wards, Lionel  duke  of  Clarence,  second  son  of  Edward  III., 
certainly  not  an  inferior  match,  espoused  Galeazzo's  daughter. 
Both  these  connections  were  short-lived ;  but  the  union  of 
Valentine,  daughter  of  Gian  Galeazzo,  with  the  duke  of  Or- 
leans, in  1389,  produced  far  more  important  consequences, 
and  served  to  transmit  a  claim  to  her  descendants,  Louis  XII. 
and  Francis  I.,  from  which  the  long  calamities  of  Italy  at  the 
beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  were  chiefly  derived.  Not 
long  after  this  marriage  the  Visconti  were  tacitly  admitted 
among  the  reigning  princes,  by  the  erection  of 
Milan  into  a  duchy  under  letters-patent  of  the 
emperor  Wenceslaus.2 

The  imperial  authority  over  Italy  was  almost  entirely  sus- 
pended after  the  death  of  Frederic  II.     A  long  interregnum 
followed  in   Germany  ;  and  when  the  vacancy  was  supplied 
by  Rodolph  of  Hapsburg,  he  was  too  prudent   to  Relatlons  f 
dissipate  his  moderate  resources  where  the  great  the  empire 
house  of   Suabia  had  failed.     About  forty  years  ^^ 

J     J  ^_d   1272. 

afterwards  the  emperor  Henry  of  Luxemburg,  a 
prince,  like  Rodolph,  of  small  hereditary  posses-  HenryJ71 
sions,  but  active  and  discreet,  availed  himself  of 
the  ancient    respeet  borne    to  the  imperial  name,  and    the 
mutual  jealousies  of  the  Italians,  to  recover  for  a  very  short 
time  a  remarkable  influence.     But,  though  professing  neu- 
trality and  desire  of  union  between  the  Guelfs  and  Ghibelins, 
he  could  not  succeed  in  removing  the  distrust  of  the  former ; 
his  exigencies  impelled  him  to  large  demands  of  money  ;  and 
the  Italians,  when  they  counted  his  scanty  German  cavalry, 
perceived  that  obedience  was  altogether  a  matter  of  their 
own  choice.     Henry  died,  however,  in  time  to  save  himself 
from  any  decisive  reverse      His  successors,  Louis  of  Bavaria 
and  Charles  IV.,  descended  from  the  Alps  with  similar  mo- 

1  Delia  qual  cosa  il  Re  molto  sdegno  nobleman  of  Pisa,  though  a  sort  of  princ* 

3e  prese.     Villani,  1    ix.  c.  93.     It  was  in  Sardinia,  to  marry  one  of  the  Visconti 

recKoned  a   misalliance,  as    Dante   tells  Purgatorio,  cant.  viii. 
us.  in  the  widow  of  Nino  di  Gallura,  a        2  Corio,  p.  538. 


398  CESSION  OF  ROMAGNE.     Chap.  III.  Pake  II 

tives,  but  alter  some  temporary  good  fortune  were  obliged  to 
return,  not  without  discredit.  Yet  the  Italians  never  broke 
that  almost  invisible  thread  which  connected  them  with  Ger- 
many;  the  fallacious  name  of  Roman  emperor  still  chal- 
lenged their  allegiance,  though  conferred  by  seven  Teutonic 
electors  without  their  concurrence.  Even  Florence,  the  most 
independent  and  high-spirited  of  republics,  was  induced  to 
make  a  treat)-  with  Charles  IV.  in  1355,  which,  while  it  con- 
firmed all  her  actual  liberties,  not  a  little,  by  that  very  con- 
firmation, affected  her  sovereignly.1  This  deference  to  the 
supposed  prerogatives  of  the  empire,  even  while  they  were 
least  formidable,  was  partly  owing  to  jealousy  of  French  or 
.Neapolitan  interference,  partly  by  the  national  hatred  of  the 
popes  who  had  seceded  to  Avignon,  and  in  some  degree  to  a 
misplaced  respect  for  antiquity,  to  which  the  revival  of  let- 
ters had  given  birth.  The  great  civilians,  and  the  much 
greater  poets,  of  the  fourteenth  century,  taught  Italy  to  con- 
sider her  emperor  as  a  dormant  sovereign,  to  whom  her 
various  principalities  and  republics  were  subordinate,  and 
during  whose  absence  alone  they  had  legitimate  authority. 
In  one  part,  however,  of  that  country,  the  empire  had, 
Cession  of  soon  a^ter  tne  commencement  of  this  period,  spon- 
Komaguato  taneously  renounced  its  sovereignty.  From  the 
era  of  Pepin's  donation,  confirmed  and  extended 
by  many  subsequent  charters,  the  Iioly  See  had  tolerably 
just  pretensions  to  the  province  entitled  Romagna,  or  the 
exarchate  of  Ravenna.  But  the  popes,  whose  menaces  were 
dreaded  at  the  extremities  of  Europe,  were  still  very  weak 
as  temporal  princes.     Even  Innocent  III.  had  never  been 

i  The  republic  of  Florence  was  at  In  this,  it  must  be  owned,  he  assumes  a 
this  time  in  considerable  peril  from  a  decided  tone  of  sovereignty.  The  gon- 
coalition  of  the  Tuscan  cities  against  her,  falonier  and  priors  are  declared  to  be  his 
which  rendered  the  protection  of  the  vicars.  The  deputies  of  the  city  did 
emperor  convenient.  But  it  was  very  homage  and  swore  obedience.  Circum 
reluctantly  that  she  acquiesced  in  even  a  stances  induced  the  principal  citizens  to 
nominal  submission  to  his  authority.  The  make  this  submission,  which  they  knew 
Florentine  envoys,  in  their  first  address,  to  be  merely  nominal.  But  the  high- 
would  only  use  the  words,  Santa  Corona,  spirited  people,  nor  so  indifferent  about 
or  Serenissimo  Principe  ;  senza  ricordarlo  names,  came  into  it  very  unwillingly 
unperadore,  o  dimostrargli  alcana  reve-  The  treaty  was  seven  times  proposed, 
renza  di  suggezzione  domandando  che  and  as  often  rejected,  in  the  consiglio  del 
il  commune  di  Firenze  volea  essendogli  popolo,  before  their  feelings  were  sub- 
ubbidiente,  le  cotali  e  le  cotali  fran-  dued.  Its  publication  was  received  with 
chigie  per  mantenere  il  suo  popolo  nell'  no  marks  of  joy.  The  public  buildings 
usata  fiber tade.  Mat.  Villani,  p.  274.  alone  were  illuminated :  bu*  a  sad  silence 
(Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  xiv.)  This  style  indicated  the  wounded  pride  of  every 
made  Charles  angry;  and  the  city  soon  private  citizen.  — M.  Villani,  p.  230,  290 
atoned  for  it  by  accepting  his  privilege.  Sismondi,  t.  vi.  p.  238 


Italy.  INTERNAL   STATE   OF   ROME.  39a 

able  to  obtain  possession  of  this  part  of  St.  Peter's  patri- 
mony. The  circumstances  of  Rodolph's  accession  inspired 
Nicholas  III.  with  more  confidence.  That  emperor  granted 
a  confirmation  of  everything  included  in  the  donations  of 
Louis  L,  Otho,  and  his  othei  predecessors ;  but  was  still  re- 
luctant or  ashamed  to  renounce  his  imperial  rights.  Accord- 
ingly his  charter  is  expressed  to  be  granted  without  diminu- 
tion of  the  empire  (sine  demembratione  imperii)  ;  and  his 
chancellor  received  an  oath  of  fidelity  from  the  cities  of  Ro 
magna.  But  the  pope  insisting  firmly  on  his  own  claim, 
Rodolph  discreetly  avoided  involving  himself  in  a  fatal  quar- 
rel, and,  in  1278,  absolutely  released  the  imperial  supremacy 
over  all  the  dominions  already  granted  to  the  Holy  See.1 

This  is  a  leading  epoch  in  the  temporal  monarchy  of  Rome. 
But  she  stood  only  in  the  place  of  the  emperor ;  and  her 
ultimate  sovereignty  was  compatible  with  the  practicable  in- 
dependence of  the  free  cities,  or  of  the  usurpers  who  had 
risen  up  among  them.  Bologna,  Faenza,  Rimini,  and  Ra- 
venna, with  many  others  less  considerable,  took  an  oath  in- 
deed to  the  pope,  but  continued  to  regulate  both  their  inter- 
nal concerns  and  foreign  relations  at  their  own  discretion. 
The  first  of  these  cities  was  far  preeminent  above  the  rest 
for  population  and  renown,  and,  though  not  without  several 
intermissions,  preserved  a  republican  character  till  the  end 
of  the  fourteenth  century.  The  rest  were  soon  enslaved  by 
petty  tyrants,  more  obscure  than  those  of  Lombardy.  It  was 
not  easy  for  the  pontiffs  of  Avignon  to  reinstate  themselves 
in  a  dominion  which  they  seemed  to  have  abandoned ;  but 
they  made  several  attempts  to  recover  it,  sometimes  with 
spiritual  arms,  sometimes  with  the  more  efficacious  aid  of 
mercenary  troops.  The  annals  of  this  part  of  Italy  are 
peculiarly  uninteresting. 

Rome  itself  was,  throughout  the  middle  ages,  very  little 
disposed  to  acquiesce  in  the  government  of  her  Internal 
bishop.     His   rights  were   indefinite,  and   uncon-  state  of 
firmed  by  positive  law ;    the   emperor  was  long 
sovereign,  the  people  always  meant  to  be  free.     Besides  the 
common  causes  of  insubordination  and  anarchy  among  the 
Italians,  which  applied  equally  to  the  capital  city,  other  sen- 
timents more  peculiar  to  Rome  preserved  a  continual,  though 

i  Muratcr>    ad  aim.  1274,  1275,  V27S  ;  Sismoudi,  t.  iii.  p.  461 


400  INTERNAL   STATE  OF  ROME.     Chap.  HI.  Part  H 

not  uniform,  influence  for  many  centuries.  There  still  re- 
mained enough  in  the  wreck  of  that  vast  inheritance  tc 
swell  the  bosoms  of  her  citizens  with  a  consciousness  of  their 
own  dignity.  They  bore  the  venerable  name,  they  contem- 
plated the  monuments  of  art  and  empire,  and  forgot,  in  the 
illusions  of  national  pride,  that  the  tutelar  gods  of  the  build- 
ing were  departed  forever.  About  the  middle  of  the  twelfth 
century  these  recollections  were  heightened  by  the  eloquence 
of  Arnold  of  Brescia,  a  political  heretic  who  preached  against 
the  temporal  jurisdiction  of  the  hierarchy.  In  a  temporary 
intoxication  of  fancy,  they  were  led  to  make  a  ridiculous 
show  of  self-importance  towards  Frederic  Barbarossa,  when 
he  came  to  receive  the  imperial  crown;  but  the  German 
sternly  eluded  their  ostentation,  and  chastised  their  resistance.1 
With  the  popes  they  could  deal  more  securely.  Several  of 
them  were  expelled  from  Rome  during  that  age  by  the  sedi- 
tious citizens.  Lucius  II.  died  of  hurts  received  in  a  tumult. 
The  government  was  vested  in  fifty-six  senators,  annually 
chosen  by  the  people,  through  the  intervention  of  an  electoral 
body,  ten  delegates  from  each  of  the  thirteen  districts  of  the 
city.2  This  constitution  lasted  not  quite  fifty  years.  In  1192 
Rome  imitated  the  prevailing  fashion  by  the  appointment  of 
an  annual  foreign  magistrate.3  Except  in  name,  the  senator 
of  Rome  appears  to  have  perfectly  resembled  the  podesta  of 
other  cities.  This  magistrate  superseded  the  representative 
senate,  who  had  proved  by  no  means  adequate  to  control  the 
most  lawless  aristocracy  of  Italy.  I  shall  not  repeat  the  story 
of  Brancaleon's  rigorous  and  inflexible  justice,  which  a  great 
historian  has  already  drawn  from  obscurity.  It  illustrates 
not  the  annals  of  Rome  alone,  but  the  general  state  of  Italian 
society,  the  nature  of  a  podesta's  duty,  and  the  difficulties  of 
its  execution.  The  office  of  senator  survives  after  more  than 
six  hundred  years  ;  but  he  no  longer  wields  the  "  iron  flail  "  4 
of  Brancaleon ;  and  his  nomination  proceeds,  of  course,  from 
the  supreme  pontiff,  not  from  the  people.     In  the  twelfth  and 

1  The  impertinent  address  of  a  Roman    ages  to  the   last  chapters  of   Gibbon's 
orator  to   Frederic,  and  his  answer,  are    Decline  and  Fall. 

preserved  in   Otho    of   Frisingen,   1.    ii.  3  Sismondi.  t.  ii.  p.  308. 

c.  22;  but   so  much  at  length,  that  we  4  The  readers  of  Spenser  will  recollect 

may  suspect  some  exaggeration.     Otho  the  iron   Hail    of  Talus,  the   attendant 

is  rather  rhetorical      They  may  be  read  of  Arthegal.   emblematic   of    the   severe 

in  Gibbon,  c.  69.  justice  of  the   lord  deputy  of   Ireland, 

2  Sismondi,   t.  ii.   p.  36.     Besides  Sis-  Sir  Arthur  G^"    shadowed  under  tha' 
mondi  and  Muratori,  I  would  refer  for  allegory. 

the  history  of  Rome  during  the  middle 


Italt.  RIENZI.  401 

thirteenth  centuri-js  the  senate,  and  the  senator  who  succeeded 
them,  exercised  one  distinguishing  attribute  of  sovereignty, 
that  of  coining  gold  and  silver  money.  Some  of  their  coins 
still  exist,  with  legends  in  a  very  republican  tone.1  Doubt 
less  the  temporal  authority  of  the  popes  varied  according  to 
their  personal  character.  Innocent  III.  had  much  more  than 
his  predecessors  for  almost  a  century,  or  than  some  of  his 
successors.  He  made  the  senator  take  an  oath  of  fealty  to 
him,  which,  though  not  very  comprehensive,  must  have  passed 
in  those  times  as  a  recognition  of  his  superiority.'2 

Though  there  was  much  less  obedience  to  any  legitimate 
power  at  Rome  than  anywhere  else  in  Italy,  even  during  the 
thirteenth  century,  yet,  after  the  secession  of  the  popes  to 
Avignon,  their  own  city  was  left  in  a  far  worse  condition  than 
before.  Disorders  of  every  kind,  tumult  and  robbery,  pre- 
vailed in  the  streets.  The  Roman  nobility  were  engaged  in 
perpetual  war  with  each  other.  Not  content  with  their  own 
fortified  palaces,  they  turned  the  sacred  monuments  of  antiq- 
uity into  strongholds,  and  consummated  the  destruction  of 
time  and  conquest.  At  no  period  has  the  city  endured  such 
irreparable  injuries ;  nor  was  the  downfall  of  the  western 
empire  so  fatal  to  its  capital  as  the  contemptible  feuds  of  the 
Orsini  and  Colonna  families.  Whatever  there  was  of  gov- 
ernment, whether  administered  by  a  legate  from  Avignon  or 
by  the  municipal  authorities,  had  lost  all  hold  on  these  power- 
ful barons.  In  the  mid^t  of  this  degradation  and  wretched- 
ness, an  obscure  man,  Nicola  di  Rienzi,  conceived  The  tribune 
the  project  of  restoring  Rome,  not  only  to  good  Rienzi. 
order,  but  even  to  her  ancient  greatness.  He  had 
received  an  education  beyond  his  birth,  and  nourished  his 
mind  with  the  study  of  the  best  writers.  After  many  ha- 
rangues to  the  people,  which  the  nobility,  blinded  by  their 
self-confidence,  did  not  attempt  to  repress,  Rienzi  suddenly 
excited  an  insurrection,  and  obtained  complete  success.  He 
was  placed  at  the  head  of  a  new  government,  with  the  title 
of  Tribune,  and  with  almost  unlimited  power.  The  first 
effects  of  this  revolution  were  wonderful.  All  the  nobles 
submitted,  though  with  great  reluctance ;  the  roads  were 
cleared  of  robbers ;  tranquillity  was  restored  at  home  ;  some 
severe  examples  of  justice  intimidated  offenders ;    and  the 

i  Gibbon,  vol.  xii.  p.  289  :  Muratori,  Antiquit.  Ital.  Dissert.  27. 
2  Sismondi,  p.  309. 
vol    i. — m  26 


102  AFFAIRS  OF   ROME.        Chap.  III.  Part  II 

tribune  was  regarded  by  all  the  people  as  the  destined  re- 
storer of  Rome  and  Italy.  Though  (he  court  of  Avignon 
could  not  approve  of  such  an  usurpation,  it  temporized 
enough  not  directly  to  oppose  it.  Most  of  the  Italian  repub- 
lics, and  some  of  the  princes,  sent  ambassadors,  and  seemed 
to  recognize  pretensions  which  were  tolerably  o.-tentatious 
The  king  of  Hungary  and  queen  of  Naples  submitted  then 
quarrel  to  the  arbitration  of  Rienzi,  who  did  not,  however 
undertake  to  decide  upon  it.  But  this  sudden  exaltation  in 
toxical ed  his  understanding,  and  exhibited  failings  entirely 
incompatible  with  his  elevated  condition.  If  Rienzi  had  lived 
in  our  own  age,  his  talents,  which  were  really  great,  would  have 
found  their  proper  orbit.  For  his  character  was  one  not 
unusual  among  literary  politicians  —  a  combination  of  knowl- 
edge, eloquence,  and  enthusiasm  for  ideal  excellence,  with 
vanity,  inexperience  of  mankind,  unsteadiness,  and  physical 
timidity.  As  these  latter  qualities  became  conspicuous,  they 
eclipsed  his  virtues  and  caused  his  benefits  to  be  forgotten ; 
he  was  compelled  to  abdicate  his  government,  and  retire  into 
exile.  After  several  years,  some  of  which  he  passed  in  the 
prisons  of  Avignon,  Rienzi  was  brought  back  to  Rome,  with 
the  title  of  Senator,  and  under  the  command  of  the  legate. 
It  was  supposed  that  the  Romans,  who  had  returned  to  their 
habits  of  insubordination,  would  gladly  submit  to  their  favor- 
ite tribune.  And  this  proved  the  case  for  a  few  months ;  but 
after  that  time  they  ceased  altogether  to  respect  a  man  who  so 
little  respected  himself  in  accepting  a  station  where  he  could 
no  longer  be  free ;  and  Rienzi  was  killed  in  a  sedition.1 

Once  more,  not  long  after  the  death  of  Rienzi,  the  free- 
Subsequent     dom  of  Rome  seems  to  have  revived  in  republican 
affairs  of        institutions,  though  with  names  less  calculated  to 
inspire  peculiar  recollections.     Magistrates  called 

1  Sismondi,  t.  v.  c.  37;  t.  vi.  p.  201  ;  the  revolution  produced  by  Rienzi.   Gio- 

Qibbon,  c.  70  ;  De  Sade,  Vie  de  Petrarque,  vanni  Villani,  living  at  Florence,  and  a 

t.  ii.  passim  ;  Tiraboschi,   t.   vi.   p.  339.  stanch  republican,  formed  a  very  differ 

It   is   difficult   to   resist   the  admiration  ent  estimate,    which  weighs  more   than 

which  all  the  romantic  circumstances  of  the  enthusiastic  panegyrics  of  Petrarch 

Jtienzi's  history   tend   to  excite,  and  to  La  detta    impresa  del  tribuno  era  un' 

which    Petrarch    so   blindly    gave   way.  opera  fantastica,  e  di  poco  durare.    1  xii. 

That  great   man's   characteristic   excel-  c.  90.     An   illustrious  female  writer  ha* 

lence  was  not  good  common  sense.     He  drawn  with  a  single  stroke  the  character 

had  imbibed  two  notions,  of  which  it  is  of    Rienzi,   Crescentius,   and   Arnold  of 

hard  to  say  which  was  the  more  absurd  :  Brescia,  the  fond  restorers  of  Roman  lib- 

that  Rome  had  a  legitimate  right  to  all  erty,  qui  out  pris  les  souvenirs  pour  lei 

her  ancient  authority  over  the  rest  of  the  espirances.     Corinne,  t.  i.  p.  159.    Could 

world;  and  that   she   was   likely  to   re-  Tacitus  have  excelled  this  ? 
*OT«r  this  authority  in  consequence  of 


flAIiT.  AFFAIRS   OF   ROME.  403 

bannerets,  chosen  from  the  thirteen  districts  of  the  city,  with 
a  militia  of  three  thousand  citizens  at  their  command,  were 
placed  at  the  head  of  this  commonwealth.     The  great  object 
of  this  new  organization  was  to  intimidate  the  Roman   nobil- 
ity, whose  outrages,  in  the  total  absence  of  government,  had 
grown  intolerable.     Several  of  them  were  hanged  the  first 
year  by  order  of  the  bannerets.     The  citizens,  however,  had 
no  serious  intention  of  throwing  off  their  allegiance  to  the 
popes.     They  provided  for  their  own  security,  on  account  of 
the  lamentable  secession  and  neglect  of  those  who  claimed 
allegiance  while  they  denied  protection.     But  they  were  ready 
td  acknowledge  and  welcome  back  their  bishop  as  their  sov- 
ereign.    Even  without  this  they  surrendered  their  republican 
constitution  in  1362,  it  does  not  appear  for  what  reason,  and 
permitted  the  legate  of  Innocent  VI.  to  assume  the  govern- 
ment.1    We  find,  however,  the  institution  of  bannerets  re- 
vived and  in  full  authority  some  years  afterwards.     But  the 
internal  history  of  Rome  appears  to  be  obscure,  and  I  have 
not  had  opportunities  of  examining  it  minutely.     Some  de- 
gree of  political  freedom  the  city  probably  enjoyed  during 
the  schism  of  the  church ;  but  it  is  not  easy  to  discriminate 
the   assertion  of  legitimate   privileges   from   the   licentious 
tumults  of  the  barons  or  populace.     In   1435  the   Romans 
formally  took  away  the  government  from  Eugenius  IV.,  and 
elected  seven  signiors  or  chief  magistrates,  like  the  priors 
of  Florence.2    But  this  revolution  was  not  of  long  continuance. 
On  the  death  of  Eugenius  the  citizens  deliberated  upon  pro- 
posing a  constitutional  charter  to  the  future  pope.     Stephen 
Porcaro,  a  man  of  good  family  and  inflamed  by  a  strong 
spirit  of  liberty,  was  one  of  their  principal  instigators.     But 
the  people   did  not  sufficiently  partake  of  that  spirit.     No 
measures  were  taken  upon  this  occasion  ;  and  Porcaro,  whose 
ardent  imagination  disguised  the  hopelessness  of  his  enter- 
prise, tampering  in  a  fresh  conspiracy,  was  put  to  death  under 
the  pontificate  of  Nicholas  V.8 

The  province  of  Tuscany  continued  longer  Citie8  of 
than  Lombardy  under  the  government  of  an  im-  Jj^j; 
perial  lieutenant.     It  was  not  till  about  the  mid- 

i  Matt.  Villain,  p.  576,  604,  709 ;  Sis-  2  Script.  Rerum  Italic,  t.  iii.  pare  2 

tnondi,   t.   v.  p.  92.     He  seems  to  have  p.  1128. 

overlooked  the  former  period  of  govern-  3  Id.  p.    1131,1134;    bismonii.   t.   x 

rient  by  bannerets,  and  refers  their  iD  p  18. 
*  itution  to  1375- 


404  CITIES  OF  TUSCANY.     Chap.  HI.  Paet  11 

die  of  the  twelfth  century  that  the  cities  of  Florence,  Lucca, 
Pisa,  Siena,  Arezzo,  Pistoja,  and  several  less  considerable 
which  might,  perhaps,  have  already  their  own  elected  magis- 
trates, became  independent  republics.  Their  history  is,  with 
the  exception  of  Pisa,  very  scanty  till  the  death  of  Frederic 
II.  The  earliest  fact  of  any  importance  recorded  of  Flor- 
ence occurs  in  1184,  when  it  is  said  that  Frederic  Barbarossa 
took  from  her  the  dominion  over  the  district  or  county,  and 
restored  it  to  the  rural  nobility,  on  account  of  her  attach- 
ment to  the  church.1  This  I  chiefly  mention  to  illustrate 
the  system  pursued  by  the  cities,  of  bringing  the  territorial 
proprietors  in  their  neighborhood  under  subjection.  Dm-mg 
the  reign  of  Frederic  II.  Florence  became,  as  far  as  she  was 
able,  an  ally  of  the  popes.  There  was,  indeed,  a  strong 
Ghibelin  party,  comprehending  many  of  the  greatest  fami 
lies,  which  occasionally  predominated  through  the  assistance 
of  the  emperor.  It  seems,  however,  to  have  existed  chiefly 
among  the  nobility ;  the  spirit  of  the  people  was  thoroughly 
Guelf.  After  several  revolutions,  accompanied  by  alter- 
nate proscription  and  demolition  of  houses,  the  Guelf  party, 
through  the  assistance  of  Charles  of  Anjou,  obtained  a  final 
ascendency  in  12G6;  and  after  one  or  two  unavailing  schemes 
of  accommodation  it  was  established  as  a  fundamental  law  in 
the  Florentine  constitution  that  no  person  of  Ghibelin  ances- 
try could  be  admitted  to  offices  of  public  trust,  which,  in  such 
a  government,  was  in  effect  an  exclusion  from  the  privileges 
of  citizenship. 

The  changes  of  internal  government  and  vicissitudes  of 
Government  success  among  factions  were  so  frequent  at  Flor- 
of  Florence.    ence  for  many  years  after  this  time  that  she  is 

compared  by  her  great  banished  poet  to  one  in  sickness, 
who,  unable  to  rest,  gives  herself  momentary  ease  by  con 
tinual  change  of  posture  in  her  bed.2  They  did  not  become 
much  less  numerous  after  the  age  of  Dante.  Yet  the  revo- 
lutions of  Florence  should,  perhaps,  be  considered  as  no  more 
than  a  necessary  price  of  her  liberty.  It  was  her  boast  and 
her  happiness  to  have  escaped,  except  for  one  short  period, 
that  odious  rule  of  vile  usurpers,  under  which  so  many  other 
free  cities  had  been  crushed.     A  sketch  of  the  constitution 

i  Villani,  1.  v.  c.  12.  Che   nou   puo   trovar  posa  in  su  1< 
1  E  se  ben  ti  ricordi,  e  vedi  il  lume,  piume, 

Vedrai    te   somigliante  a  quella  in-  Ma  con  dar  volta  suo  dolore  schenna 
ferma,  Purgatorio,  cant,  vl 


»xaly.        GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.  405 

of  so  famous  a  republic  ought  not  to  be  omitted  in  this  place. 
Nothing  else  in  the  history  of  Italy  after  Frederic  II.  is  >o 
worthy  of  our  attention.1 

The  basis  of  the  Florentine  polity  was  a  division  of  the 
citizens  exercising  commerce  into  their  several  companies  or 
arts.  These  were  at  first  twelve  ;  seven  called  the  greater 
arts,  and  five  lesser;  but  the  latter  were  gradually  increased 
to  fourteen.  The  seven  greater  arts  were  those  of  lawyers 
and  notaries,  of  dealers  in  foreign  cloth,  called  sometimes 
Calimala,  of  bankers  or  money-changers,  of  woollen-drapers, 
of  physicians  and  druggists,  of  dealers  in  silk,  and  of  fur- 
riers. The  inferior  arts  were  those  of  retailers  of  cloth, 
butchers,  smiths,  shoemakers,  and  builders.  This  division, 
so  far  at  least  as  regarded  the  greater  arts,  was  as  old  as  the 
beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.2  But  it  was  fully 
established  and  rendered  essential  to  the  constitution  in  1266. 
By  the  provisions  made  in  that  year  each  of  the  seven  greater 
arts  had  a  council  of  its  own,  a  chief  magistrate  or  consul, 
who  administered  justice  in  civil  causes  to  all  members  of 
his  company,  and  a  banneret  (gonfaloniere)  or  military  offi- 
cer, to  whose  standard  they  repaired  when  any  attempt  was 
made  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the  city. 

The  administration  of  criminal  justice  belonged  at  Flor- 
ence, as  at  other  cities,  to  a  foreign  podesta,  or  rather  to  two 
foreign  magistrates,  the  podesta  and  the  capitano  del  popolo, 
whose  jurisdiction,  so  far  as  I  can  trace  it,  appears  to  have 
been  concurrent.3  In  the  first  part  of  the  thirteenth  century 
the  authority  of  the  podesta  may  have  been  more  extensive 
than  afterwards.  These  offices  were  preserved  till  the  in- 
novations of  the  Medici.  The  domestic  magistracies  under- 
went more  changes.  Instead  of  consuls,  which  had  been  the 
first  denomination  of  the  chief  magistrates  of  Florence,  a 
college  of  twelve  or  fourteen  persons  called  Anziani  or  Buo- 
nuomini,  but  varying  in  name  as  well  as  number,  according 
to  revolutions  of  party,  was  established  about  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  to  direct  public  affairs.4     This  order 

1 1  have  found  considerable  difficulties  press  themselves  rather  inaccurately,  as 

In  this  part  of  my  task ;  no  author  with  if  they  had  been  erected  at   that  time, 

whom  I  am  acquainted  giving  a  tolerable  which  indeed  is  the  era  of  their  political 

view  of  the  Florentine  government,  ex-  importance. 

cept  M.    Sismondi,  who  is  himself  not  3  Matteo   Villani,   p.   194.     G.   Villanl 

ilways  satisfactory.  places  the  institution  of  the  podesta  in 

2  Ammirato,   ad    ann.    1204  et    1235.  1207 ;   we  find  it,   however,  as  early  a: 

Villani  iutimates,  1.  vii.  c.  13,  that  the  1184.     Ammirato. 

arts  existed  as  commercial  companies  be-  4  <i.  Villani,  1.  vi.  c.  39. 
fore  1266.     Machiavelli  and  Sismondi  ex- 


40fi  GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.    Chap.  m.  Part   I). 

was  entiiely  changed  in  1282,  and  gave  place  to  a  new  form 
of  supreme  magistracy,  which  lasted  till  the  extinction  of  the 
republic.  Six  priors,  elected  every  two  months,  one  from 
each  of  the  six  quarters  of  the  city,  and  from  each  of  the 
greater  arts,  except  that  of  lawyers,  constituted  an  executive 
magistracy.  They  lived  during  their  continuance  in  office 
in  a  palace  belonging  to  the  city,  and  were  maintained  at  the 
public  cost.  The  actual  priors,  jointly  with  the  chiefs  and 
councils  (usually  called  la  capitudine)  of  the  seven  greater 
arts,  and  with  certain  adjuncts  (arroti)  named  by  themselves, 
elected  by  ballot  their  successors.  Such  was  the  practice 
for  about  forty  years  after  this  government  was  established. 
But  an  innovation,  begun  in  1324,  and  perfected  four  years 
afterwards,  gave  a  peculiar  character  to  the  constitution  of 
Florence.  A  lively  and  ambitious  people,  not  merely  jeal- 
ous of  their  public  sovereignty,  but  deeming  its  exercise  a 
matter  of  personal  enjoyment,  aware  at  the  same  time  that 
the  will  of  the  whole  body  could  neither  be  immediately  ex- 
pressed on  all  occasions,  nor  even  through  chosen  representa- 
tives, without  the  risk  of  violence  and  partiality,  fell  upon 
the  singular  idea  of  admitting  all  citizens  not  unworthy  by 
their  station  or  conduct  to  offices  of  magistracy  by  rotation. 
Lists  were  separately  made  out  by  the  priors,  the  twelve 
buonuomini,  the  chiefs  and  councils  of  arts,  the  bannerets 
and  other  respectable  persons,  of  all  citizens,  Guelfs  by 
origin,  turned  of  thirty  years  of  age,  and,  in  their  judgment, 
worthy  of  public  trust.  The  lists  thus  formed  were  then 
united,  and  those  who  had  composed  them,  meeting  together,  in 
number  ninety-seven,  proceeded  to  ballot  upon  every  name. 
Whoever  obtained  sixty-eight  black  balls  was  placed  upon 
the  reformed  list ;  and  all  the  names  it  contained,  being  put 
on  separate  tickets  into  a  bag  or  purse  (imborsati),  were 
drawn  successively  as  the  magistracies  were  renewed.  As 
there  were  above  fifty  of  these,  none  of  which  could  be  held 
for  more  than  four  months,  several  hundred  citizens  were 
called  in  rotation  to  bear  their  share  in  the  government  with- 
in two  years.  But  at  the  expiration  of  every  two  years  the 
scrutiny  was  renewed,  and  fresh  names  were  mingled  with 
those  which  still  continued  undrawn  ;  so  that  accident  might 
deprive  a  man  for  life  of  his  portion  of  magistracy.1 

i  Villani,  1.  ix.  c.  27, 1.  x.  c.  110.  1.  xi.  an  apparent  fairness  and  incompatibil- 
c.  105:  Sismondi,  t.  v.  p.  174.  This  spe-  ity  with  undue  influence,  was  epeedilj 
Mes  of   lottery,  nvommending  itself  by    adopted  in  all  the  neighboring  republics. 


Italy.  m  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.  40? 

Four  councils  had  been  established  by  the  constitution  of 
1266  for  the  decision  of  all  propositions  laid  before  them  by 
the  executive  magistrates,  whether  of  a  legislative  nature  or 
relating  to  public  policy.  These  were  now  abrogated ;  and 
in  their  places  were  substituted  one  of  300  members,  all  ple- 
beians, called  consiglio  di  popolo,  and  one  of  250,  called  con 
siglio  di  commune,  into  which  the  nobles  might  enter.  These 
were  changed  by  the  same  rotation  as  the  magistracies,  every 
four  months.1  A  parliament,  or  general  assembly  of  the 
Florentine  people,  was  rarely  convoked;  but  the  leading 
principle  of  a  democratical  republic,  the  ultimate  sovereignty 
of  the  multitude,  was  not  forgotten.  This  constitution  of 
1324  was  fixed  by  the  citizens  at  large  in  a  parliament ;  and 
the  same  sanction  was  given  to  those  temporary  delegations 
of  the  signiory  to  a  prince,  which  occasionally  took  place. 
What  is  technically  called  by  their  historians  farsi  popolo  was 
the  assembly  of  a  parliament,  or  a  resolution  of  all  deriv- 
ative powers  into  the  immediate  operation  of  the  popular 
will. 

The  ancient  government  of  this  republic  appears  to  have 
been  chiefly  in  the  hands  of  its  nobility.  These  were  very 
numerous,  and  possessed  large  estates  in  the  district.  But  by 
the  constitution  of  1266,  which  was  nearly  coincident  with 
the  triumph  of  the  Guelf  faction,  the  essential  powers  of 
magistracy  as  well  as  of  legislation  were  thrown  into  the 
scale  of  the  commons.  The  colleges  of  arts,  whose  functions 
became  so  eminent,  were  altogether  commercial.  Many,  in- 
deed, of  the  nobles  enrolled  themselves  in  these  companies, 
and  were  among  the  most  conspicuous  merchants  of  Flor- 
ence. These  were  not  excluded  from  the  executive  college 
of  the  priors  at  its  first  institution  in  1282.  It  was  neces- 
sary, however,  to  belong  to  one  or  other  of  the  greater  arts  in 
order  to  reach  that  magistracy.  The  majority,  therefore,  of 
the  ancient  families  saw  themselves  pushed  aside  from  the 
helm,  which  was  intrusted  to  a  class  whom  they  had  habitu- 
ally held  in  contempt. 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  nobility  made  any  overt  oppo- 
sition to  these  democratical  institutions.     Confident  in  a  force 


and  has  always  continued,  according  to    the  privilege  of  choosing  their  municipal 
Sismondi,  in  Lucca,  and  in  those  cities    officers :  p.  95. 

of  the  ecclesiastical  state  which  preserved        l  Villani.  1.  ix.  c.  27, 1.  x.  c.  IjIJ,  I    xi 

c  105 ;  Sismondi,  t.  v.  p.  174. 


408  GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.    Chap.  IIJ   Part  u 

beyond  the  law,  they  cared  less  for  what  the  law  might  pro- 
vide against  them.  They  still  retained  the  proud  spirit  of 
personal  independence  which  had  belonged  to  their  ancestors 
in  the  fastnesses  of  the  Apennines.  Though  the  laws  of 
Florence  and  a  change  in  Italian  customs  had  transplant- 
ed their  residence  to  the  city,  it  was  in  strong  and  lofty  houses 
that  they  dwelt,  among  their  kindred,  and  among  the  fellows 
of  their  rank.  Notwithstanding  the  tenor  of  the  constitution, 
Florence  was  for  some  years  after  the  establishment  of  priors 
incapable  of  resisting  the  violence  of  her  nobility.  Her  his- 
torians all  attest  the  outrages  and  assassinations  committed  by 
them  on  the  inferior  people.  It  was  in  vain  that  justice  was 
offered  by  the  podesta  and  the  capitano  del  popolo.  Wit 
nesses  dared  not  to  appear  against  a  noble  offender;  or  if,  on 
a  complaint,  the  officer  of  justice  arrested  the  accused,  his 
family  made  common  cause  to  rescue  their  kinsman,  and  the 
populace  rose  in  defence  of  the  laws,  till  the  city  was  a  scene 
of  tumult  and  bloodshed.  I  have  already  alluded  to  this  in- 
subordination of  the  higher  classes  as  general  in  the  Italian 
republics  ;  but  the  Florentine  writers,  being  fuller  than  the 
rest,  are  our  best  specific  testimonies.1 

The  dissensions  between  the  patrician  and  plebeian  orders 

1on.        ran  very  high,  when  Giano  della  Bella,  a  man  of 
a.d.  1295.  .  1-    °  ,  ,i        .i  ,  .  • 

ancient   lineage,  but  attached,   without  ambitious 

views,  so  far  as  appears,  though  not  without  passion,  to  the 
popular  side,  introduced  a  series  of  enactments  exceedingly 
disadvantageous  to  the  ancient  aristocracy.  The  first  of 
these  was  the  appointment  of  an  executive  officer,  the  gonfa 
lonier  of  justice,  whose  duty  it  was  to  enforce  the  sentences 
of  the  podesta  and  capitano  del  popolo  in  cases  where  the  or 
dinary  officers  were  insufficient.  A  thousand  citizens,  after- 
wards increased  to  four  times  that  number,  were  bound  to 
obey  his  commands.  They  were  distributed  into  companies, 
the  gonfaloniers  or  captains  of  which  became  a  sort  of  cor- 
poration or  college,  and  a  constituent  part  of  the  government. 
,nn.  This  new  militia  seems  to  have  superseded  that 
oi  the  companies  or  arts,  which  I  have  not  ob- 
served to  be  mentioned  at  any  later  period.  The  gonfalonier 
of  justice  was  part  of  the  signiory  along  with  the  priors,  of 
whom  he  was  reckoned  the  president,  and  changed,  like  tin  m, 

i  Villain,  1.   vii.  c     113,   1.   viii.   c.   8;   Ammirato,   Storia   Fiorentina.   1.   iv    in 
corainciamento. 


Italy.  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.  40\J 

every  two  months.  He  was,  in  fact,  the  first  magistrate  of 
Florence.1  If  Giano  della  Bella  had  trusted  to  the  efficacy 
of  this  new  security  for  justice,  his  fame  would  have  "beer 
beyond  reproach.  But  he  followed  it  up  by  harsher  pro- 
visions. The  nobility  were  now  made  absolutely  ineligible 
to  the  office  of  prior.  For  an  offence  committed  by  one  of  a 
noble  family,  his  relations  were  declared  responsible  in  a 
penalty  of  3000  pounds.  And,  to  obviate  the  difficulty  aris- 
ing from  the  frequent  intimidation  of  witnesses,  it  was  pro- 
vided that  common  fame,  attested  by  two  credible  persons, 
should  be  sufficient  for  the  condemnation  of  a  nobleman.2 

These  are  the  famous  ordinances  of  justice  which  passed 
at  Florence  for  the  great  charter  of  her  democracy.  They 
have  been  reprobated  in  later  times  as  scandalously  unjust ; 
and  I  have  little  inclination  to  defend  them.  The  last,  espe- 
cially, was  a  violation  of  those  eternal  principles  which  for- 
bid us,  for  any  calculations  of  advantage,  to  risk  the  sacrifice 
of  innocent  blood.  But  it  is  impossible  not  to  perceive  that 
the  same  unjust  severity  has  sometimes,  under  a  like  pretext 
of  necessity,  been  applied  to  the  weaker  classes  of  the  peo- 
ple, which  they  were  in  this  instance  able  to  exercise  towards 
their  natural  superiors. 

The  nobility  were  soon  aware  of  the  position  in  which 
they  stood.  For  half  a  century  their  great  object  was  to 
procure  the  relaxation  of  the  ordinances  of  justice.  But 
they  had  no  success  with  an  elated  enemy.  In  three  years' 
time,  indeed,  Giano  della  Bella,  the  author  of  these  institu- 
tions, was  driven  into  exile ;  a  conspicuous,  though  by  no 
means  singular,  proof  of  Florentine  ingratitude.3  The  wealth 
and  physical  strength  of  the  nobles  were,  however,  untouched  ; 
and  their  influence  must  always  have  been  considerable.  In 
the  great  feuds  of  the  Bianchi  and  Neri  the  ancient  families 
were  most  distinguished.  No  man  plays  a  greater  part  in  the 
annals  of  Florence  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century 

1  It  is   to  be    regretted   that  the  ac-  gonfaloniere  di  giustizia,  il   popolo  e   '1 

complished   biographer    of   Lorenzo    de'  comune  della  citti  di  Firenze.  Q.  Villani, 

Medici  should  have  taken   no   pains   to  1.  xii.  c.  109. 

inform  himself  of  the  most  on  linary  par-  -Villani,  1.  viii.  c.    1;    Ammirato,  p. 

ticulars  in  the  constitution  of  Florence.  188,   edit.    1<>47.      A   magistrate,    called 

Among  many  other  errors  he  Bays,  vol.  ii.  V  esecuto/  della  giustizia,  was  appointed 

p.  51,  5th  edit.,  that  the  gonfalonier  of  with  authority  equal  to  that  of  the  po- 

justice  was  subordinate  to  the  delegated  dest.i  for  the  special  purpose  of  watching 

mechanics  (a  bad  expression),  or  priori  over  the  observation  of  the  ordinances  of 

dell' arti, whose  number,  too.  he  augments  justice.     Ammirato,  p.  666. 

to  ten.     The  proper  style  of  the  republic  3  Villani,  1.  viii.  c.  8. 
leems  to  run   thus :  I  priori  dell'  art!  e 


410  GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.    Chap.  III.  Part  li 

than  Corso  Donati,  chief  of  the  latter  faction,  who  might  pass 
as  representative  of  the  turbulent,  intrepid,  ambitious  citizen- 
noble  of  an  Italian  republic.1  But  the  laws  gradually  be- 
came more  sure  of  obedience  ;  the  sort  of  proscription  which 
attended  the  ancient  nobles  lowered  their  spirit ;  while  a  new 
aristocracy  began  to  raise  its  head,  the  aristocracy  of  families 
who,  after  filling  the  highest  magistracies  for  two  or  three 
generations,  obtained  an  hereditary  importance,  which  an- 
swered the  purpose  of  more  unequivocal  nobility ;  just  a->  in 
ancient  Rome  plebeian  families,  by  admission  to  curule  of- 
fices, acquired  the  character  and  appellation  of  nobility,  and 
were  only  distinguishable  by  their  genealogy  from  the  origi- 
nal patricians.2  Florence  had  her  plebeian  nobles  (popolani 
grandi),  as  well  as  Rome  ;  the  Peruzzi,  the  Ricci,  the  Albizi, 
the  Medici,  correspond  to  the  Catos,  the  Pompeys,  the  Bru 
tuses,  and  the  Antonies.  But  at  Rome  the  two  orders,  after  an 
equal  partition  of  the  highest  offices,  were  content  to  respect 
their  mutual  privileges ;  at  Florence  the  commoner  preserved  a 
rigorous  monopoly,  and  the  distinction  of  high  birth  was,  that 
it  debarred  men  from  political  franchises  and  civil  justice.3 

This  second  aristocracy  did  not  obtain  much  more  of  the 
popular  affection  than  that  which  it  superseded.  Public  out- 
rage and  violation  of  law  became  less  frequent ;  but  the  new 
leaders  of  Florence  are  accused  of  continual  misgovernment 
at  home  and  abroad,  and  sometimes  of  peculation.  There 
was  of  course  a  strong  antipathy  between  the  leading  com- 
moners and  the  ancient  nobles ;  both  were  disliked  by  the 
people.  Iu  order  to  keep  the  nobles  under  more  control  the 
governing  party  more  than  once  introduced  a  new  foreign 
magistrate,  with  the  title  of  captain  of  defence  (della  guar- 
dia),  whom  they  invested  with  an  almost  unbounded  criminal 
a.d.  1336.  jurisdiction.  One  Gabrielli  of  Agobbio  was  twice 
a.d.  1340.  fetched  for  this  purpose  ;  and  in  each  case  he  be- 
haved in  so  tyrannical  a  manner  as  to  occasion  a  tumult.4 
His  office,  however,  was  of  short  duration,  and  the  title  at 
least  did  not  import  a  sovereign  command.     But  very  soon 

1  Dino  Compagni ;  Villani.  e  la  Fiorentina  nobilita.   Animirato  delle 

2  La  nobilita  civile,  se  bene  non  in  Famiglie  Florentine.  Firenze,  1614.  p.  25. 
baronaggi,  e  capace  di  grandissiini  honori,  y  Quello,  die  all'  altre  citta  suolo 
perciocbe  esercitando  i  supremi  magis-  recare  splendorc  i'i  Firenze  era  danucso, 
trati  dell',  sua  patria,  viene  spesso  a  o  veramente  vano  e  inutile,  says  Am- 
coma n da  ■  a  capitani  d'  eserciti  ••  ella  mirato  of  nobility.  Storia  Fiorentina, 
Btessa  pe     e  o  in  mare,  o  in  terra,  molte  p.  161. 

rota  i  s       emi  caricni  adopera.     E  tale        *  Villani,  1.  xi.  c.  39  and  117. 


tTALY.  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.  41] 

afterwards  Florence  had  to  experience  one  taste  of  a  cup 
which  her  neighbors  had  drunk  off  to  the  dregs,  and  to  ani- 
mate her  magnanimous  love  of  freedom  by  a  knowledge  of 
the  calamities  of  tyranny. 

A  war  with  Pisa,  unsuccessfully,  if  not  unskilfully,  con- 
ducted, gave  rise  to  such  dissatisfaction  in  the  city,  that  the 
leading  commoners  had  recourse  to  an  appointment  some- 
thing like  that  of  Gabrielli,  and  from  similar  motives. 
Walter  de  Brienne,  duke  of  Athens,  was  descended  from  one 
of  the  French  crusaders  who  had  dismembered  the  Grecian 
empire  in  the  preceding  century ;  but  his  father,  defeated 
in  battle,  had  lost  the  principality  along  with  his  life,  and  the 
titular  duke  was  an  adventurer  in  the  court  of  France.  He 
had  been,  however,  slightly  known  at  Florence  on  a  former 
occasion.  There  was  an  uniform  maxim  among  the  Italian 
republics  that  extraordinary  powers  should  be  conferred 
upon  none  but  strangers.  The  duke  of  Athens  was  accord- 
ingly pitched  upon  for  the  military  command,  which  was 
united  with  domestic  jurisdiction.  This  appears  to  have 
been  promoted  by  the  governing  party  in  order  to  curb  the 
nobility ;  but  they  were  soon  undeceived  in  their  expecta- 
tions. The  first  act  of  the  duke  of  Athens  was  to  bring  four 
of  the  most  eminent  commoners  to  capital  punishment  foi 
military  offences.  These  sentences,  whether  just  or  other- 
wise, gave  much  pleasure  to  the  nobles,  who  had  so  frequently 
been  exposed  to  similar  severity,  and  to  the  populace,  who 
are  naturally  pleased  with  the  humiliation  of  their  superiors. 
Both  of  these  were  caressed  by  the  duke,  and  both  conspired, 
with  blind  passion,  to  second  his  ambitious  views.  It  was 
proposed  and  carried  in  a  full  parliament,  or  assembly  of  the 
people,  to  bestow  upon  him  the  signiory  for  life.  The  real 
friends  of  their  country,  as  well  as  the  oligarchy, 
shuddered  at  this  measure.  Throughout  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  party  Florence  had  never  yet  lost  sight  of 
republican  institutions.  Not  that  she  had  never  accommo- 
dated herself  to  temporary  circumstances  by  naming  a 
signior.  Charles  of  Ajijou  had  been  invested  with  that  dig- 
nity for  the  term  of  ten  years ;  Robert  king  of  Naples  for 
five ;  and  his  son,  the  duke  of  Calabria,  was  at  his  death 
signior  of  Florence.  These  princes  named  the  podesta,  if 
not  the  priors ;  and  were  certainly  pretty  absolute  in  their 
executive  powers,  though  bound  by  oath  not  to  alter  the 


412       GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.  Chap.  III.  Pakt  II. 

statutes  of  the  city.1  But  their  office  had  always  been  tem- 
porary. Like  the  dictatorship  of  Rome,  it  was  a  confessed, 
unavoidable  evil ;  a  suspension,  but  not  extinguishment,  of 
rights.  Like  that,  too,  it  was  a  dangerous  precedent, 
through  which  crafty  ambition  and  popular  rashness  might 
ultimately  subvert  the  republic.  If  Walter  de  Brienne  had 
possessed  the  subtle  prudence  of  a  Matteo  Visconti  or  a  Cane 
della  Scala,  there  appears  no  reason  to  suppose  that  Florence 
would  have  escaped  the  fate  of  other  cities ;  and  her  history 
might  have  become  as  useless  a  record  of  perfidy  and  assas- 
sination as  that  of  Mantua  or  Verona.2 

But,  happily  for  Florence,  the  reign  of  tyranny  was  very 
short.  The  duke  of  Athens  had  neither  judgment  nor 
activity  for  so  difficult  a  station.  He  launched  out  at  once 
into  excesses  which  it  wrould  be  desirable  that  arbitrary  power 
should  always  commit  at  the  outset.  The  taxes  were  consid- 
erably increased ;  their  produce  was  dissipated.  The  honor 
of  the  state  was  sacrificed  by  an  inglorious  treaty  with  Pisa ; 
her  territory  was  diminished  by  some  towns  throwing  off 
their  dependence.  Severe  and  multiplied  punishments  spread 
terror  through  the  city.  The  noble  families,  who  had  on  the 
duke's  election  destroyed  the  ordinances  of  justice,  now 
found  themselves  exposed  to  the  more  partial  caprice  of  a 
despot.  He  filled  the  magistracies  with  low  creatures  from 
the  inferior  artificers ;  a  class  which  he  continued  to  flatter.1 
Ten  months  passed  in  this  manner,  when  three  separate  con- 
spiracies, embracing  most  of  the  nobility  and  of  the  great 
commoners,  were  planned  for  the  recovery  of  freedom.  The 
duke  was  protected  by  a  strong  body  of  hired  cavalry. 
Revolutions  in  an  Italian  city  were  generally  effected  by 
surprise.  The  streets  were  so  narrow  and  so  easily  secured 
by  barricades,  that,  if  a  people  had  time  to  stand  on  its 
defence,  no  cavalry  was  of  any  avail.  On  the  other  hand,  a 
body  of  lancers  in  plate-armor  might  dissipate  any  number 
of  a  disorderly  populace.  Accordingly,  if  a  prince  or  usurper 
would  get  possession  by  surprise,  he,  as  it  was  called,  rode  the 
city ;  that  is,  galloped  with  his  cavalry  along  the  streets,  so 
as  to  prevent  the  people  from  collecting  to  erect  barricades. 
This  expression  is  very  usual  with  historians  of  the  four- 
teenth century.4      The  conspirators  at    Florence   were  too 

i  Villani,  1.  ix.  c.  55,  60,  135,  328.  3  villani,  c.  8. 

«  Id.  1.  xii.  c.  1,  2,  3.  *  Villani  1.  x.  c.  81;  Castruccio  .  . 


VTAL* 


GOVERNMENT  OF   FLORENCE.  413 


quick  for  the  duke  of  Athens.  The  city  was  barricaded  in 
every  direction;  and  after  a  contest  of  some  duration  he 
consented  to  abdicate  his  signiory. 

Thus  Florence  recovered  her  liberty.     Her  constitutional 
laws  now  seemed  to  revive  of  themselves.     But  the  nobility, 
who  had  taken  a  very  active  part  in  the  recent  liberation  of 
their  country,  thought  it  hard  to  be  still  placed  under  the 
rigorous    ordinances  of  justice.     Many  of  the   richer   com- 
moners acquiesced  in  an  equitable  partition  of  magistracies, 
which  was  established  through  the  influence  of  the  bishop. 
But  the  populace  of  Florence,  with  its  characteristic  forget- 
fulness  of  benefits,  was  tenacious  of  those  proscriptive  ordi- 
nances.    The  nobles  too,  elated  by  their  success,  began  again 
to  strike  and  injure  the  inferior  citizens.     A  new  civil  war 
in  the  city-streets  decided  their  quarrel;  after  a  desperate 
resistance  many  of  the  principal  houses  were  pillaged  and 
burned;    and  the  perpetual  exclusion  of  the  nobility  was 
confirmed  by  fresh  laws.     But  the  people,  now  sure  of  their 
triumph,  relaxed  a  little  upon  this  occasion  the  ordinances  of 
justice  ;  and  to  make  some  distinction  in  favor  of  merit  or 
innocence,  effaced  certain  families  from  the  list  of  nobility. 
Five  hundred  and  thirty  persons  were  thus  elevated,  as  we 
may  call  it,  to  the  rank  of  commoners.1     As  it  was  beyond 
the  competence  of  the  republic  of  Florence  to  change  a  man's 
ancestors,  this  nominal  alteration  left  all  the  real  advantages 
of  birth  as  they  were,  and  was  undoubtedly  an  enhancement 
of  dignity,   though,    in   appearance,   a   very    singular   one. 
Conversely,  several  unpopular  commoners  were  ennobled,  in 
order  to  disfranchise  them.     Nothing  was  more  usual  in  sub- 
sequent times  than  such  an  arbitrary  change  of  rank,  as  a 
penalty  or   a   benefit.2     Those  nobles   who  were  rendered 
plebeian  by  favor,  were  obliged  to  change  their  name  and 
arms.3      The    constitution    now   underwent    some    change. 
From  six  the  priors  were  increased  to  eight;   and  instead 

corse  la  citta  di   Pisa  due  volte.      Sis-  such  in  the  ordinances  of  justice ;  at  least 

mondi,  t.  v.  p.  105.  I  <lo  not    know  what  other    definition 

lVUlani,   1.   xii.  c.   18-23.      Sismondi  there  was.                                        , 

Bays,  by   a  momentary  oversight,   cinq  2  Messer  Antonio  di  Baldinaccio  degli 

cent  trente  families,  t.  v.  p  377.     There  Adimari,  tutto  che  fosse  de  piu  grandi  * 

were  but  thirty-seven  noble  families  at  nobili,  per  grazia  era  uiesso  tra  '1  popolo 

Florence,  as    M.   Sismondi  himself  in-  —  Villain,  1.  xn.  c.  108. 

forms  us,  t.  iv.  p.   66;  though   Villani  3  Ammirato.  p.  (48.    There  were  sever* 

reckons   the  number  of  individuals  at  exceptions  to  this  rule  in   later  times 

1500.      Nobles,  or   grandi    as  they  are  The  Pazzi  were  made  popolani,  plebeians 

more  strictly  called,  were  such  as  had  by  favor  of  Cosmo  de'  Medici,     ilachia 

been  inscribed,  or  rather  proscribed,  as  velli. 


414  GOVERNMENT  OF   FLOIJENCE.    CiiAr.  III.  1'akt  II 

of  being  chosen  from  each  of  the  greater  arts,  they  were 
taken  from  the  four  quarters  of  the  city,  the  lesser  artisans, 
as  I  conceive,  being  admissible.  The  gonfaloniers  of  compa- 
nies were  reduced  to  sixteen.  And  these,  along  with  the 
signiory,  and  the  twelve  buonuomini,  formed  the  college, 
where  every  proposition  was  discussed  before  it  could  be 
offered  to  the  councils  for  their  legislative  sanction.  But  it 
could  only  originate,  strictly  speaking,  in  the  signiory,  that  is, 
the  gonfalonier  of  justice,  and  eight  priors,  the  rest  of  the 
jollese  having  merely  the  function  of  advice  and  assist- 
ance.1 

Several  years  elapsed  before  any  material  disturbance  arose 
at  Florence.  Her  contemporary  historian  complains,  indeed, 
that  mean  and  ignorant  persons  obtained  the  office  of  prior, 
and  ascribes  some  errors  in  her  external  policy  to  this  cause.3 
Besides  the  natural  effects  of  the  established  rotation,  a  par- 
ticular law,  called  the  divieto,  tended  to  throw  the  better 
families  out  of  public  office.  By  this  law  two  of  the  same 
name  could  not  be  drawn  for  any  magistracy :  which,  as  the 
ancient  families  were  extremely  numerous,  rendered  it  diffi- 
cult for  their  members  to  succeed ;  especially  as  a  ticket  once 
drawn  was  not  replaced  in  the  purse,  so  that  an  individual 
liable  to  the  divieto  was  excluded  until  the  next  biennial  rev 
olution.3  This  created  dissatisfaction  among  the  leading 
families.  They  were  likewise  divided  by  a  new  faction, 
entirely  founded,  as  far  as  appears,  on  personal  animosity 
between  two  prominent  houses,  the  Albizi  and  the  Ricci. 
The  city  was,  however,  tranquil,  when  in  1357  a  spring  was 
set  in  motion  which  gave  quite  a  different  character  to  the 
domestic  history  of  Florence. 

At  the  time  when  the  Guelfs,  with  the  assistance  of 
Charles  of  Anjou,  acquired  an  exclusive  domination  in  the 
republic,  the  estates  of  the  Ghibelins'  were  confiscated. 
One  third  of  these  confiscations  was  allotted  to  the  state ; 
another  went  to  repair  the  losses  of  Guelf  citizens ;  but  the 
remainder  became  the  property  of  a  new  corporate  society, 
denominated  the  Guelf  party  (parte  Guelfa),  with  a  regular 
internal  organization.  The  Guelf  party  had  two  councils, 
one  of  fourteen  and  one  of  sixty  members ;  three,  or  after- 

i  Nardi,  Storia  «li  Firenze,  p.  7,  edit.        °-  Matteo  Villani  in  Script   Iter.  Italic 
1684.     Villani,  loc.  cit.  t.  xiv.  p.  98.  244. 

3  SLsmondi,  t.  vi.  p.  838 


Italy  GOVERNMENT   OF   FLORENCE.  415 

ward?  four,  captains,  elected  by  scrutiny  every  two  months,  a 
treasury,  and  common  seal ;  a  little  republic  within  the  repub- 
lic of  Florence.  Their  primary  duty  was  to  watch  over  the 
Guelf  interest ;  and  for  this  purpose  they  had  a  particular 
officer  for  the  accusation  of  suspected  Ghibelins.1  We  hear 
not  much,  however,  of  the  Guelf  society  for  near  a  century 
after  their  establishment.  The  Ghibelins  hardly  ventured 
to  show  themselves  after  the  fall  of  the  White  Guelfs  in 
1304,  with  whom  they  had  been  connected,  and  confiscation 
had  almost  annihilated  that  unfortunate  faction.  But  as  the 
oligarchy  of  Guelf  families  lost  part  of  its  influence  through 
the  divieto  and  system  of  lottery,  some  persons  of  Ghibelin 
descent  crept  into  public  offices ;  and  this  was  exaggerated 
by  the  zealots  of  an  opposite  party,  as  if  the  fundamental 
policy  of  the  city  was  put  into  danger. 

The  Guelf  society  had  begun,  as  early  as  1346,  to  mani- 
fest some  disquietude  at  the- foreign  artisans,  who,  settling  at 
Florence  and  becoming  members  of  some  of  the  trading  cor- 
porations, pretended  to  superior  offices.  They  procured  ac- 
cordingly a  law  excluding  from  public  trust  and  magistracy 
all  persons  not  being  natives  of  the  city  or  its  territory. 
Next  year  they  advanced  a  step  farther ;  and,  with  a  view  to 
prevent  disorder,  which  seemed  to  threaten  the  city,  a  law 
was  passed  declaring  every  one  whose  ancestors  at  any  time 
since  1300  had  been  known  Ghibelin-,  or  who  had  not  the 
reputation  of  sound  Guelf  principles,  incapable  of  being 
drawn  or  elected  to  offices.2  It  is  manifest  from  the  language 
of  the  historian  who  relates  these  circumstances,  and  whose 
testimony  is  more  remarkable  from  his  having  died  several 
years  before  the  politics  of  the  Guelf  corporation  more 
decidedly  showed  themselves,  that  the  real  cause  of  their 
jealousy  was  not  the  increase  of  Ghibelin  ism,  a  merely 
plausible  pretext,  but  the  democratical  character  which  the 
government  had  assumed  since  the  revolution  of  1343  ;  which 
raised  the  fourteen  inferior  arts  to  the  level  of  those  which 
the  great  merchants  of  Florence  exercised.  In  the  Guelf 
society  the  ancient  nobles  retained  a  considerable  influence. 
The  laws  of  exclusion  had  never  been  applied  to  that  corpo- 
ration. Two  of  the  captains  were  always  noble,  two  were 
commoners.     The  people,  in  debarring  the  nobility  from  ordi 

i  Q.  VillaDi,  1.  vii.  c.  16.  «  G  Vil'ani,  1.  xii.  c.  72  and  79 


416  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.    Chap.  III.  Part  II 

nary  privileges,  were  little  aware  of  the  more  dangerous  chan- 
nel which  had  been  left  open  to  their  ambition.  With  the  no- 
bility some  of  the  great  commoners  acted  in  concert,  and  espe- 
cially the  family  and  faction  of  the  Albizi.  The  introduction 
of  obscure  persons  into  office  still  continued,  and  some  meas- 
ures more  vigorous  than  the  law  of  1347  seemed  necessary 
to  restore  the  influence  of  their  aristocracy.  They  proposed, 
and,  notwithstanding  the  reluctance  of  the  priors,  carried  by 
violence,  both  in  the  preliminary  deliberations  of  the  signiory 
and  in  the  two  councils,  a  law  by  which  every  person  ac- 
cepting an  office  who  should  be  convicted  of  Ghibelinism  or 
of  Ghibelin  descent,  upon  testimony  of  public  fame,  became 
liable  to  punishment,  capital  or  pecuniary,  at  the  discretion 
of  tho  priors.  To  this  law  they  gave  a  retrospective  effect, 
and  indeed  it  appears  to  have  been  little  more  than  a  revival 
of  the  provisions  made  in  1347,  which  had  probably  been 
disregarded.  Many  citizens  who  had  been  magistrates  with- 
in a  few  years  were  cast  in  heavy  fines  on  this  indefinite 
charge.  But  the  more  usual  practice  was  to  warn  (am- 
monire)  men  beforehand  against  undertaking  public  trust. 
If  they  neglected  this  hint,  they  were  sure  to  be  treated  as 
convicted  Ghibelins.  Thus  a  very  numerous  class,  called 
Ammoniti,  was  formed  of  proscribed  and  discontented  per- 
sons, eager  to  throw  off  the  intolerable  yoke  of  the  Guelf 
society.  For  the  imputation  of  Ghibelin  connections  was 
generally  an  unfounded  pretext  for  crushing  the  enemies  of 
the  governing  faction.1  Men  of  approved  Guelf  principles 
and  origin  were  every  day  warned  from  their  natural  privi- 
leges of  sharing  in  magistracy.  This  spread  an  universal 
alarm  through  the  city;  but  the  great  advantage  of  union  and 
secret  confederacy  rendered  the  Guelf  society,  who  had  also 
the  law  on  their  side,  irresistible  by  their  opponents.  Mean- 
while the  public  honor  was  well  supported  abroad ;  Florence 
had  never  before  been  so  distinguished  as  during  the  preva- 
lence of  this  oligarchy.2 

1  Besides    the    effect  of  ancient    pre-  Villani  says  of  Passerino,  lord  of  Mantua, 

judice,   Ghibelinism  was    considered  at  that  his  ancestors  had  been  Guelfs,  ma 

Floience,  in  the  fourteenth   century,  as  per  essere  signore  e  tiranno  si  fece  Ghib- 

immediately  connected   with  tyrannical  ellino :  1.  x.  c.  99.     Aud  Matteo  Villani 

usurpation.  The  Guelf  party,  says  Matteo  of  the  Pepoli  at  Bologna;  essendo  di  na- 

Villani,  is  the  foundation  rock  of  liberty  tura  Guelfi.  per  la  tirannia  erano  quasi 

in  Italy ;  so  that,  if  any  Guelf  becomes  a  alienati  della  parte  :  p.  69. 

tyrant,  he  must  of  necessity  turn  to  the  -  M.    Villani,    p.    531,   637,   731.     Am 

Ghibelin  side ;  and  of  this  I  here  have  been  mirato ;  Maehiavelli ;  Sismondi. 
many   instances:   p.   481.     So   Giovanni 


Italy.  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.  417 

The  Guelf  society  had  governed  with  more  or  less  abso- 
luteness for  near  twenty  years,  when  the  republic  became  in- 
volved, through  the  perfidious  conduct  of  the  papal  legate,  in 
a  war  with  the  Holy  See.  Though  the  Florentines  were  by 
no  means  superstitious,  this  hostility  to  the  church  appeared 
almost  an  absurdity  to  determined  Guelfs,  and  shocked  thos'.' 
prejudices  about  names  which  make  up  the  politics  of  vulgar 
minds.  The  Guelf  society,  though  it  could  not  openly  resist 
the  popular  indignation  against  Gregory  XL,  was  not  heartily 
inclined  to  this  war.  Its  management  fell  therefore  into  the 
hands  of  eight  commissioners,  some  of  them  not  well  affected 
to  the  society  ;  whose  administration  was  so  successful  and 
popular  as  to  excite  the  utmost  jealousy  in  the  Guelfs.  They 
began  to  renew  their  warnings,  and  in  eight  months  excluded 
fourscore  citizens.1 

The  tyranny  of  a  court  may  endure  for  ages ;  but  that  of 
a  faction  is  seldom  permanent.  In  June,  1378,  the  gonfa- 
lonier of  justice  was  Salvestro  de'  Medici,  a  man  of  approved 
patriotism,  whose  family  had  been  so  notoriously  of  Guelf 
principles,  that  it  was  impossible  to  warn  him  from  office. 
He  proposed  to  mitigate  the  severity  of  the  existing  law. 
His  proposition  did  not  succeed ;  but  its  rejection  provoked 
an  insurrection,  the  forerunner  of  still  more  alarming  tumults. 
The  populace  of  Florence,  like  that  of  other  cities,  was  ter- 
rible in  the  moment  of  sedition ;  and  a  party  so  long  dreaded 
shrunk  before  the  physical  strength  of  the  multitude.  Many 
leaders  of  the  Guelf  society  had  their  houses  destroyed,  and 
some  fled  from  the  city.  But  instead  of  annulling  their  acts, 
a  middle  course  was  adopted  by  the  committee  of  magistrates 
who  had  been  empowered  to  reform  the  state ;  the  Ammoniti 
were  suspended  three  years  longer  from  office,  and  the  Guelf 
society  preserved  with  some  limitations.  This  temporizing 
course  did  not  satisfy  either  the  Ammoniti  or  the  populace. 
The  greater  arts  were  generally  attached  to  the  Guelf  society. 
Between  them  and  the  lesser  arts,  composed  of  retail  and 
mechanical  traders,  there  was  a  strong  jealousy.  The  latter 
were  adverse  to  the  prevailing  oligarchy  and  to  the  Guelf 
society,  by  whose  influence  it  was  maintained.  They  were 
eager  to  make  Florence  a  democracy  in  fact  as  well  is  in 
name,  by  participating  in  the  executive  government. 

i  Ammirato,  p.  709. 
VOL.  I.  --M.  27 


418  GOVERNMENT  OK   FLORENCE.    Chap.  III.  Part  II 

But  every  political  institution  appears  to  rest  on  too  eon 
fined  a  basis  to  those  whose  point  of  view  is  from  beneath  it. 
While  the  lesser   arts  were    murmuring   at   the    exclusive 

privileges  of  the  commercial  aristocracy,  there  was  yet  an  in- 
ferior class  of  citizens  who  thought  their  own  claims  to  equal 
privileges  irrefragable.  The  arrangement  of  twenty-one 
trading  companies  had  still  left  several  kinds  of  artisans  un- 
incorporated, and  consequently  unprivileged.  These  had  been 
attached  to  the  art  with  which  their  craft  had  most  connec- 
tion in  a  sort  of  dependent  relation.  Thus  to  the  company 
of  drapers,  the  most  wealthy  of  all,  the  various  occupations 
instrumental  in  the  manufacture,  as  woolcombers,  dyers,  and 
weavers,  were  appendant.1  Besides  the  sense  of  political 
exclusion,  these  artisans  alleged  that  they  were  oppressed 
by  their  employers  of  the  art,  and  that,  when  they  com- 
plained to  the  consul,  their  judge  in  civil  matters,  no  redress 
could  be  procured.  A  still  lower  order  of  the  community 
tfas  the  mere  populace,  who  did  not  practise  any  regular 
trade,  or  who  only  worked  for  daily  hire.  These  were  called 
Ciompi,  a  corruption,  it  is  said,  of  the  French  compere. 

"  Let  no  one,"  says  Machiavel  in  this  place,  "  who  begins 
an  innovation  in  a  state  expect  that  he  shall  stop  it  at  his 
pleasure,  or  regulate  it  according  to  his  intention."  After 
about  a  month  from  the  first  sedition  another  broke  out,  in 
which  the  ciompi,  or  lowest  populace,  were  alone  concerned. 
Through  the  surprise,  or  cowardice,  or  disaffection  of  the  su- 
perior citizens,  this  was  suffered  to  get  ahead,  and  for  three 
days  the  city  was  in  the  hand  of  a  tumultuous  rabble.  It 
was  vain  to  withstand  their  propositions,  had  they  even  been 
more  unreasonable  than  they  were.  But  they  only  demanded 
the  establishment  of  two  new  arts  for  the  trades  hitherto  de- 
pendent, and  one  for  the  lower  people  ;  and  that  three  of  the 
priors  should  be  chosen  from  the  greater  arts,  three  from  the 
fourteen  lesser,  and  two  from  those  just  created.  Some  de- 
lay, however,  occurring  to  prevent  the  sanction  of  these  in- 
novations by  the  councils,  a  new  fury  took  possession  of  the 
populace ;  the  gates  of  the  palace  belonging  to  the  signiory 
were  forced  open,  the  priors  compelled  to  fly,  and  no  appear 
ance  of  a  constitutional  magistracy  remained  to  throw  the 
veil  of  law  over  the    excesses  of  anarchy.     The  republic 

1  Before  the  year  1340,   according    to  VillanTs    calculation,   the  woolen   trad* 
occupied  30,000  persons.  1.  xi.  c.  93- 


iTALr.  GOVERNMENT   OF   FLORENCE.  419 

seemed  to  rock  from  its  foundations ;  and  the  circumstance  to 
which  historians  ascribe  its  salvation  is  not  the  least  singular 
in  this  critical  epoch.  One  Michel  di  Lando,  a  woolcomber 
half  dressed  and  without  shoes,  happened  to  hold  the  standard 
of  justice  wrested  from  the  proper  officer  when  the  populace 
burst  into  the  palace.  Whether  he  was  previously  conspicu- 
ous in  the  tumult  is  not  recorded ;  but  the  wild,  capricious 
mob,  who  had  destroyed  what  they  had  no  conception  how  to 
rebuild,  suddenly  cried  out  that  Lando  should  be  gonfalonier 
or  signior,  and  reform  the  city  at  his  pleasure. 

A  choice,  arising  probably  from  wanton  folly,  could  not 
have  been  better  made  by  wisdom.  Lando  was  a  man  of 
xourage,  moderation,  and  integrity.  He  gave  immediate 
proofs  of  these  qualities  by  causing  his  office  to  be  respected. 
The  eight  commissioners  of  the  war,  who,  though  not  insti- 
gators of  the  sedition,  were  well  pleased  to  see  the  Guelf 
party  so  entirely  prostrated,  now  fancied  themselves  masters, 
and  began  to  nominate  priors.  But  Lando  sent  a  message  to 
them,  that  he  was  elected  by  the  people,  and  that  he  could 
dispense  with  their  assistance.  He  then  proceeded  to  the 
choice  of  priors.  Three  were  taken  from  the  greater  arts  ; 
three  from  the  lesser ;  and  three  from  the  two  new  arts  and 
the  lower  people.  This  eccentric  college  lost  no  time  in  re- 
storing tranquillity,  and  compelled  the  populace,  by  threat  of 
punishment,  to  return  to  their  occupations.  But  the  ciompi 
were  not  disposed  to  give  up  the  pleasures  of  anarchy  so 
readily.  They  were  dissatisfied  at  the  small  share  allotted 
to  them  in  the  new  distribution  of  offices,  and  murmured  at 
their  gonfalonier  as  a  traitor  to  the  popular  cause.  Lando 
was  aware  that  an  insurrection  was  projected ;  he  took  meas- 
ures with  the  most  respectable  citizens ;  the  insurgents,  when 
they  showed  themselves,  were  quelled  by  force,  and  the  gon- 
falonier retired  from  office  with  an  approbation  which  all  his- 
torians of  Florence  have  agreed  to  perpetuate.  Part  of  this 
has  undoubtedly  been  founded  on  a  consideration  of  the  mis 
chief  which  it  was  in  his  power  to  inflict.  The  ciompi,  once 
checked,  were  soon  defeated.  The  next  gonfalonier  was, 
like  Lando,  a  woolcomber  ;  but,  wanting  the  intrinsic  merit  of 
Lando,  his  mean  station  excited  universal  contempt.  None 
of  the  arts  could  endure  their  low  coadjutors  ;  a  short  struggle 
was  made  by  the  populace,  but  they  were  entirely  overpow- 
ered with  considerable  slaughter,  and  the  government  wad 


420  GOVERNMENT  OF  FLORENCE.     Chap.  ILL  Par*  II 

divided  between  the  seven  greater  and  sixteen  lesser  arts,  in 
nearly  equal  proportions. 

The  party  of  the  lesser  art.-,  or  inferior  tradesmen,  which 
had  begun  this  confusion,  were  left  winners  when  it  ceased. 
Three  men  of  distinguished  families  who  had  instigated  the 
revolution  became  the  leaders  of  Florence;  Benedetto  Alb<r- 
ti,  Tomaso  Strozzi,  and  Georgio  Scali.  Their  government 
had  at  first  to  contend  with  the  ciompi,  smarting  under  loss 
and  disappointment.  But  a  populace  which  is  beneath  the 
inferior  mechanics  may  with  ordinary  prudence  be  kept  in 
subjection  by  a  government  that  has  a  well-organized  militia 
at  its  command.  The  Guelf  aristocracy  was  far  more  to  be 
dreaded.  Some  of  them  had  been  banished,  some  fined, 
some  ennobled  :  the  usual  consequences  of  revolution  which 
they  had  too  often  practised  to  complain.  A  more  iniquitous 
proceeding  disgraces  the  new  administration.  Under  pre- 
tence of  conspiracy,  the  chief  of  the  house  of  Albizi,  and 
several  of  his  most  eminent  associates,  were  thrown  into 
prison.  So  little  evidence  of  the  charge  appeared  that  the 
podesta  refused  to  condemn  them  ;  but  the  people  were  clam- 
orous for  blood,  and  half  with,  half  without  the  forms  of  jus- 
tice, these  noble  citizens  were  led  to  execution.  The  part  he 
took  in  this  murder  sullies  the  fame  of  Benedetto  Alberti, 
who  in  his  general  conduct  had  been  more  uniformly  influ- 
enced by  honest  principles  than  most  of  his  contemporaries. 
Those  who  shared  with  him  the  ascendency  in  the  existing 
government,  Strozzi  and  Scab,  abused  their  power  by  oppres- 
sion towards  their  enemies,  and  insolence  towards  all.  Their 
popularity  was,  of  course,  soon  at  an  end.  Alberti,  a  sin- 
cere lover  of  freedom,  separated  himself  from  men  who 
seemed  to  emulate  the  arbitrary  government  they  had  over- 
thrown. An  outrage  of  Scali,  ir  rescuing  a  criminal  from 
justice,  brought  the  discontent  to  a  crisis  ;  he  was  arrested, 
and  lost  his  head  on  the  scaffold  ;  while  Strozzi,  his  colleague, 
fled  from  the  city  But  this  event  was  instantly  followed  by 
a  reaction,  which  Alberti,  perhaps,  did  not  anticipate.  Armed 
men  filled  the  streets ;  the  cry  of  "  Live  the  Guelfs ! "  was 
heard.  After  a  three  years'  depression  the  aristocratical  party 
regained  its  ascendency.  They  did  not  revive  the  severity 
practised  towards  the  Ammoniti ;  but  the  two  new  arts,  cre- 
ated for  the  small  trades,  were  abolished,  and  the  lesser  arts 
reduced  to  a  third  part,  instead  of  something  more  than  one 


Itali  GOVERNMENT   OF  FLORENCE.  421 

naif,  of  public  offices.  Several  persons  who  had  favored  the 
plebeians  were  sent  into  exile ;  and  among  these  Michel  di 
Lando,  whose  great  services  in  subduing  anarchy  ought  to 
have  secured  the  protection  of  every  government.  Bene- 
detto Alberti,  the  enemy  by  turns  of  every  faction  —  because 
every  faction  was  in  its  turn  oppressive  —  experienced  some 
years  afterwards  the  same  fate.  For  half  a  century  after 
this  time  no  revolution  took  place  at  Florence.  The  Guelf 
aristocracy,  strong  in  opulence  and  antiquity,  and  rendered 
prudent  by  experience,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Albizi 
family,  maintained  a  preponderating  influence  without  much 
departing,  the  times  considered,  from  moderation  and  respect 
for  the  laws.1 

It  is  sufficiently  manifest,  from  this  sketch  of  the  domestic 
history  of  Florence,  how  far  that  famous  republic  was  from 
affording  a  perfect  security  for  civil  rights  or  general  tranquil- 
lity. They  who  hate  the  name  of  free  constitutions  may  ex- 
alt in  her  internal  dissensions,  as  in  those  of  Athens  or  Rome. 
But  the  calm  philosopher  will  not  take  his  standard  of  com- 
parison from  ideal  excellence,  nor  even  from  that  practical 
good  which  has  been  reached  in  our  own  unequalled  consti- 
tution, and  in  some  of  the  republics  of  modern  Europe.  The 
men  and  the  institutions  of  the  fourteenth  century  are  to  be 
measured  by  their  contemporaries.  Who  would  not  rather 
have  been  a  citizen  of  Florence  than  a  subject  of  the  Vis- 
conti  ?  In  a  superficial  review  of  history  we  are  sometimes 
apt  to  exaggerate  the  vices  of  free  states,  and  to  lose  sight  of 
those  inherent  in  tyrannical  power.  The  bold  censoriousness 
of  republican  historians,  and  the  cautious  servility  of  writers 
under  an  absolute  monarchy,  conspire  to  mislead  us  as  to  the 
relative  prosperity  of  nations.  Acts  of  outrage  and  tumultu- 
ous excesses  in  a  free  state  are  blazoned  in  minute  detail,  and 
descend  to  posterity ;  the  deeds  of  tyranny  are  studiously  and 
perpetually  suppressed.  Even  those  historians  who  have  no 
particular  motives  for  concealment  turn  away  from  the  monoto- 
nous and  disgusting  crimes  of  tyrants.  "  Deeds  of  cruelty,"  it 
is  well  observed  by  Matteo  Villani,  after  relating  an  action  of 

i  For  this  part  of  Florentine  history,  pleasing,  but  it  breaks  off  rather  toe 
besides  Ammirato,  Machiavel,  and  Sis-  soon,  at  the  instant  of  Lando's  assuming 
uiondi,  I  have  read  an  interesting  narra-  the  office  of  banneret.  Another  con- 
tire  of  the  sedition  of  the  ciompi,  by  temporary  writer,  Melehione  de  Stefani. 
Gino  Capponi,  in  the  eighteenth  volume  who  seems  to  have  furnished  the  materi- 
vf  Muratori's  collection.  It  has  an  air  a  Is  of  the  three  historians  above  men 
of   liveliness   and   truth  which   is    very  tioued,  has  not  fallen  in  my  way. 


422  ACQUISITION  OF  TERKITOKY      Chap.  III.  Pah*  II 

Bemabo  Visconti,  "  are  little  worthy  of  remembrance  ;  yet  let 
me  be  excused  for  having  recounted  one  out  of  many,  as  an 
example  of  the  peril  to  which  men  are  exposed  under  the 
yoke  of  an  unbounded  tyranny."  *  The  reign  of  Bernabo  af- 
forded abundant  instances  of  a  like  kind.  Second  only  to 
Eccelin  among  the  tyrants  of  Italy,  he  rested  the  security  of 
his  dominion  upon  tortures  and  death,  and  his  laws  themselves 
enact  the  protraction  of  capital  punishment  through  forty 
days  of  suffering.2  His  nephew,  Giovanni  Maria,  is  said, 
with  a  madness  like  that  of  Nero  or  Commodus,  to  have 
coursed  the  streets  of  Milan  by  night  with  blood-hounds, 
ready  to  chase  and  tear  any  unlucky  passenger.8  Nor  were 
other  Italian  principalities  free  from  similar  tyrants,  though 
none,  perhaps,  upon  the  whole,  so  odious  as  the  Visconti.  The 
private  history  of  many  families,  such,  for  instance,  as  the 
Scala  and  the  Gonzaga,  is  but  a  series  of  assassinations.  The 
ordinary  vices  of  mankind  assumed  a  tint  of  portentous  guilt 
in  the  palaces  of  Italian  princes.  Their  revenge  was  fratri- 
cide, and  their  lust  was  incest. 

Though  fertile  and  populous,  the  proper  district  of  Flor- 
a  isition  ence  was  by  no  means  extensive.  An  indepen- 
of  territory  dent  nobility  occupied  the  Tuscan  Appennines  with 
by  Florence,  fo^  castles.  Of  these  the  most  conspicuous  were 
the  counts  of  Guidi,  a  numerous  and  powerful  family,  who 
possessed  a  material  influence  in  the  affairs  of  Florence  and 
of  all  Tuscany  till  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  and 
some  of  whom  preserved  their  independence  much  longer.4 
To  the  south,  the  republics  of  Arezzo,  Perugia,  and  Siena ; 
to  the  west,  those  of  Volterra,  Pisa,  and  Lucca  ;  Prato  and 
Pistoja  to  the  north,  limited  the  Florentine  territory.  It  was 
late  before  these  boundaries  were  removed.  During  the 
usurpations  of  Uguccione  at  Pisa,  and  of  Castruccio  at  Lucca, 
the  republic  of  Florence  was  always  unsuccessful  in  the  field 
After  the  death  of  Castruccio  she  began  to  act  more  vigor 
ously,  and  engaged  in  several  confederacies  with  the  powers 
of  Lombardy,  especially  in  a  league  with  Venice  against 
Mastino  della  Scala.  But  the  republic  made  no  acquisition 
of  territory  till  1351,  when  she  annexed  the  small  city  of 

l  P.  434.  The  last  of  the  counts  Guidi,  having  uu- 

a  Sismondi,  t.  vi.  p.  316;  Corio,  1st.  di  wisely  embarked  in  a  confederacy  agaius' 

Milano,  p.  486.  Florence,  was  obliged  to  give  ip  his  an- 

3  Corio.  p.  595.  cient  patrimony  in  lt40. 
*Q.  Villani,  1.  v.   c.   37,  41,  et  alibi. 


TAL.Y. 


i5Y  FLORENCE. 


423 


Prato,  noi  tin  miles  from  her  walls.1  Pistoja,  though  still 
nominally  independent,  received  a  Florentine  garrison  about 
the  same  time.  Several  additions  were  made  to  the  district 
by  fail  purchase  from  the  nobility  of  the  Appennines,  and  a 
few  by  main  force.  The  territory  was  still  very  little  pro- 
portioned to  the  fame  and  power  of  Florence.  The  latter 
was  founded  upon  her  vast  commercial  opulence.  Every 
Italian  state  employed  mercenary  troops,  and  the  richest  was 
of  course,  the  most  powerful.  In  the  war  against  Mestino 
della  Scala  in  1336  the  revenues  of  Florence  are  reckoned 
by  Villani  at  three  hundred  thousand  florins,  which,  as  he 
observes,  is  more  than  the  king  of  Naples  or  of  Aragon  pos- 
sesses.2 The  expenditure  went  at  that  time  very  much  be 
yond  the  receipt,  and  was  defrayed  by  loans  from  the  princi- 
pal mercantile  firms,  which  were  secured  by  public  funds, 
the  earliest  instance,  I  believe,  of  that  financial  resource.8 
Her  population  was  computed  at  ninety  thousand  souls. 
Villani  reckons  the  district  at  eighty  thousand  men,  I  sup- 
pose those  only  of  military  age ;  but  this  calculation  must 
have  been  too  large,  even  though  he  included,  as  we  may 
presume,  the  city  in  his  estimate.4     Tuscany,   though  well 


i  M.  Villani,  p.  72.  This  was  rather 
a  measure  of  usurpation  ;  but  the  repub- 
lic had  some  reason  to  apprehend  that 
Prato  might  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
Visconti.  Their  conduct  towards  Pistoja 
was  influenced  by  the  same  motive  ;  but 
it  was  stili  further  removed  from  abso- 
lute justice,  p.  91. 

2Q.  Villani,  1.  ix.  c  90-93.  These 
chapters  contain  a  very  full  and  interest- 
ing statement  of  the  revenues,  expenses, 
population,  and  internal  condition  of 
Florence  at  that  time.  Part  of  them  is 
extracted  by  M.  Sismondi,  t.  v.  p.  365. 
The  gold  florin  was  worth  about  ten 
shillings  of  our  money.  The  district  of 
Florence  was  not  then  much  larger  than 
Middlesex. 

a  G.  Villani.  1.  xi.  c.  49. 

*  C.  93.  Troviamo  diligentemente,  che 
in  questi  tempi  avea  in  Firenze  circa  a 
25  mila  ucmini  da  portare  arme  da  15 
in  70  anni — Stimavasi  avere  in  Firenze 
da  90  mila  bocche  tra  uomini  e  femiue  e 
fanciulii,  per  1'  avviso  del  pane  bisognava 
al  continuoalla  citta.  These  proportions 
of  25,000  men  between  fifteen  and  sev- 
enty, and  of  90,000  souls  are  as  nearly 
as  possible  consonant  to  modern  calcula- 
tion, of  which  Villani  knew  nothing, 
wbich  confirms  his  accuracy  ;  though  M. 
Sismondi  asserts,  p  369,  that  the  city 


contained  150,000  inhabitants,  on  no  bet- 
ter authority,  as  far  as  appears,  than 
that  of  Boccaccio,  who  says  that  100,000 
perished  in  the  great  plague  of  1343, 
which  was  generally  supposed  to  destroy 
two  out  of  three.  But  surely  two  vague 
suppositions  are  not  to  be  combined,  in 
order  to  overthrow  such  a  testimony  as 
that  of  Villani,  who  seems  to  have  con- 
sulted all  registers  and  other  authentic 
documents  in  his  reach. 

What  Villani  says  of  the  population 
of  the  district  may  lead  us  to  reckon  it, 
perhaps,  at  about  180,000  souls,  allowing 
the  baptisms  to  be  one  in  thirty  of  the 
population.  Ragionavasi  iu  questi  tempi 
avere  nel  contado  e  distretto  di  Firenze 
de  80  mila  uomini.  Troviamo  del  pio- 
vano,  che  battezzava  i  fanciulii,  impe- 
roche  per  ogni  maschio,  che  battezzava 
iu  San  Giovanni,  per  avere  il  novero, 
metea  una  fava  nera,  e  per  ogni  femina 
una  bianca,  trovo,  ch'  erano  l'  anno  in 
questi  tempi  dalle  5800  in  sei  mila,  avan- 
zando  le  piu  volte  il  sesso  masculino  da 
300  in  500  per  anno.  Baptisms  could 
only  be  performed  in  one  public  font,  at 
Florence,  Pisa,  and  some  other  cities. 
The  building  that  contained  this  font 
was  called  the  Baptistery.  The  baptis- 
teries of  Florence  and  Pisa  still  remain 
and  are  well  known.    Du  Cange,  v.  Bap 


424  PISA.  Chap.  III.  Part  U 

cultivated  and  flourishing,  does  not  contain  by  any  means  so 
great  a  number  of  inhabitants  in  that  space  at  present. 

The  first  eminent  conquest  made  by  Florence  was  that  of 
Pisa  Pisa,   early  in   the  fifteenth    century.     Pisa    had 

been  distinguished  as  a  commercial  city  ever  since 
the  age  of  the  Othos.  From  her  ports,  and  those  of  Genoa, 
the  earliest  naval  armaments  of  the  western  nations  were 
fitted  out  against  the  Saracen  corsairs  who  infested  the  Medi- 
terranean coasts.  In  the  eleventh  century  she  undertook, 
and,  after  a  pretty  long  struggle,  completed,  the  important, 
or  at  least  the  splendid,  conquest  of  Sardinia,  an  island  long 
subject  to  a  Moorish  chieftain.  Several  noble  families  of 
Pisa,  who  had  defrayed  the  chief  cost  of  this  expedition, 
shared  the  island  in  districts,  which  they  held  in  fief  of  the 
republic.1  At  a  later  period  the  Balearic  isles  were  sub- 
jected, but  not  long  retained,  by  Pisa.  Her  naval  prowess 
was  supported  by  her  commerce.  A  writer  of  the  twelfth 
century  reproaches  her  with  the  Jews,  the  Arabians,  and 
other  "  monsters  of  the  sea,"  who  thronged  in  her  streets.3 
The  crusades  poured  fresh  wealth  into  the  lap  of  the  mari- 
time Italian  cities.  In  some  of  those  expeditions  a  great 
portion  of  the  armament  was  conveyed  by  sea  to  Palestine, 
and  freighted  the  vessels  of  Pi*a,  Genoa,  and  Venice.  When 
the  Christians  had  bought  with  their  blood  the  sea-coast  of 
Syria,  these  republics  procured  the  most  extensive  privileges 
in  the  new  states  that  were  formed  out  of  their  slender  con- 
quests, and  became  the  conduits  through  which  the  produce 
of  the  East  flowed  in  upon  the  ruder  nations  of  Europe. 
Pisa  maintained  a  large  share  of  this  commerce,  as  well  as 
of  maritime  greatness,  till  near  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury. In  1282,  we  are  told  by  Villani,  she  was  in  great 
power,  possessing  Sardinia,  Corsica,  and  Elba,  from  whence 

tisterium.   But  there  were  fifty -seven  par-  trict  of  Florence  in  1343  is  estimated  by 

rshes  and  one  hundred  and  ten  churches  Villani   to  contain  as  great  a  number 

within  the  city.    Villani,  ibid.     Mr.  Ros-  before  Pisa,  Vol  terra,  or  even  Prato  and 

coc   has    published   a  manuscript,    evi-  Pistoja,  had  been  annexed  to  it. — Ros 

dently  written  after  the  taking  of  Pisa  in  coe  s  Life  of  Lorenzo.     Appendix,  No.  16. 

1406,  though,  as  I  should  guess,  not  long  i  Sismondi.  t.  i.  p.  345.  372. 

after  that  event,  containing  a  proposi-  2  Qui  pergit  Pisas,  videt  illic  nionstra 

tion  for  an  income-tax  of  ten  per  cent.  marina; 

throughout  the   Florentine    dominions.  Haec  urbs,  Paganis,  Turchi3,  Libycia 

Among  its  other  calculations,  the  popu-  quoque,  Parthis, 

lation  is  reckoned  at  400,000;  assuming  Sordida;  Chaldsei  sua  lustrant  moenfa 

that  to  be  the  proportion  to  80,000  men  tetri. 

of  military  age,  though  certainly  beyond  Donizo,  Vita  Comitissa?  Mathildis 

the  mark.    It  is  singular  that  the  dis-  apud  Muratori,  Dissert.  81. 


ITALY. 


PISA  425 


the  republic,  as  well  as  private  persons,  derived  large  rev- 
enues, and  almost  ruled  the  sea  with  their  ships  and  mer- 
chandises, and  beyond  sea  were  very  powerful  in  the  city  of 
Acre,  and  much  connected  with  its  principal  citizens.1  The 
prosperous  era  of  Pisa  is  marked  by  her  public  edifices. 
She  was  the  first  Italian  city  that  took  a  pride  in  architect- 
ural magnificence.  Her  cathedral  is  of  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury ;  the  baptistery,  the  famous  inclined  tower,  or  belfry,  the 
arcades  that  surround  the  Campo  Santo,  or  cemetery  of 
Pisa,  are  of  the  twelfth,  or,  at  latest,  ©f  the  thirteenth.2 

It  would  have  been  no  slight  anomaly  in  the  annals  of 
Italy,  or,  we  might  say,  of  mankind,  if  two  neighboring  cities, 
competitors  in  every  mercantile  occupation  and  every  naval 
enterprise,  had  not  been  perpetual  enemies  to  each  other.    One 
is  more  surprised,  if  the  fact  be  true,  that  no  war  broke  out 
between  Pisa  and  Genoa  till  1119.8    From  this  time  at  least 
they  continually  recurred.     An   equality   of  forces  and   of 
courage  kept  the  conflict  uncertain  for  the  greater  part  of 
two  centuries.    Their  battles  were  numerous,  and  sometime*, 
taken  separately,  decisive ;  but  the  public  spirit  and  resources 
of  each  city  were  called  out  by  defeat,  and  we  generally  find 
a  new  armament  replace  the  losses  of  an  unsuccessful  com- 
bat.    In  this  respect  the  naval  contest   between  Pisa  and 
Genoa,  though  much  longer  protracted,  resembles  that  of 
Rome  and  Carthage  in  the  first  Punic  war.     But  Pisa  was 
reserved  for  her  iEgades.     In  one  fatal  battle,  off  the  little 
isle  of   Meloria,  in   1284,  her  whole  navy  was  destroyed 
Several  unfortunate  and  expensive  armaments  had  almost  ex- 
hausted the  state,  and  this  was  the  last  effort,  by  private  sac- 
rifices, to  equip  one  more  fleet.     After  this  defeat  it  was  in 
vain  to  contend  for  empire.     Eleven  thousand  Pisans  lan- 
guished for  many  years  in  prison ;  it  was  a  current  saying 
that  whoever  would  see  Pisa  should  seek  her  at   Genoa.     A 
treacherous  chief,  that  count  Ugolino  whose   guilt  was    so 
terribly  avenged,  is  said  to  have  purposely  lost  the  battle, 
and   prevented  the  ransom  of   the    captives,  to  secure   his 
power:  accusations  that  obtain  easy  credit  with  an  unsuc- 
cessful people. 

From  the  epoch  of  the  battle  of  Meloria,  Pisa  ceased  to 

i  ViUani,  1.  vi.  c.  83. 

2  Sismondi,  t.  iv.  p.  178  ;  Tiraboschi,  t.  iii.  p.  406. 

3  Muratori,  ad  ann  1119. 


426  GENOA.  Chap.  III.  Pakt  li 

be  a  maritime  power.  Forty  years  afterwards  she  was  strip- 
ped of  her  ancient  colony,  the  island  of  Sardinia.  The  four 
Pisan  families  who  had  been  invested  with  that  conquest  had 
been  apt  to  consider  it  as  their  absolute  property  ;  their  appel- 
lation of  judge  seemed  to  indicate  deputed  power,  but  they 
sometimes  assumed  that  of  king,  and  several  at  tempt  s  had  been 
made  to  establish  an  immediate  dependence  on  the  empire, 
or  even  on  the  pope.  A  new  potentate  had  now  come  for- 
ward on  the  stage.  The  malecontent  feudataries  of  Sardinia 
made  overtures  to  the  king  of  Aragon,  who  had  no  scruples 
about  attacking  the  indisputable  possession  of  a  declining 
republic.  Pisa  made  a  few  unavailing  efforts  to  defend  Sar- 
dinia ;  but  the  nominal  superiority  was  hardly  worth  a  con- 
test ;  and  she  surrendered  her  rights  to  the  crown  of  Aragon. 
Her  commerce  now  dwindled  with  her  greatness.  During 
the  fourteenth  century  Pisa  almost  renounced  the  ocean  and 
directed  her  main  attention  to  the  politics  of  Tuscany.  Ghib- 
elin  by  invariable  predilection,  she  was  in  constant  opposition 
.o  the  Guelf  cities  which  looked  up  to  Florence.  But  in  the 
fourteenth  century  the  names  of  freeman  and  Ghibelin  were 
not  easily  united ;  and  a  city  in  that  interest  stood  insulated 
between  the  republics  of  an  opposite  faction  and  the  tyrants 
of  her  own.  Pisa  fell  several  times  under  the  yoke  of 
usurpers ;  she  was  included  in  the  wide-spreading  acquisitions 
of  Gian  Galeazzo  Visconti.  At  his  death  one  of  his  family 
seized  the  dominion,  and  finally  the  Florentines  purchased 
for  400,000  florins  a  rival  and  once  equal  city.  The  Pisans 
made  a  resistance  more  according  to  what  they  had  been 
than  what  they  were. 

The  early  history  of  Genoa,  in  all  her  foreign  relations,  is 
Genoa.  involved  in  that  of  Pisa.     As  allies  against  the 

Her  wars  Saracens  of  Africa,  Spain,  and  the  Mediterranean 
islands,  as  corrivals  in  commerce  with  these  very  Saracens 
or  with  the  Christians  of  the  East,  as  cooperators  in  the 
great  expeditions  under  the  banner  of  the  cross,  or  as  engaged 
in  deadly  warfare  with  each  other,  the  twro  republics  stand  in 
continual  parallel.  From  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 
century  Genoa  was,  I  think,  the  more  prominent  and  flour- 
ishing of  the  two.  She  had  conquered  the  island  of  Corsica 
at  the  same  time  that  Pisa  reduced  Sardinia ;  and 
her  acquisition,  though  less  considerable,  was  longer 
preserved.     Her  territory  at  home,  the  ancient  Liguria,  was 


Italy.  HER  WARS.  427 

much  more  extensive,  and,  what  was  most  important,  con- 
tained a  greater  range  of  sea-coast  than  that  of  Pisa.     But 
the  commercial  and  maritime  prosperity  of  Genoa  may  be 
dated  from  the  recovery  of  Constantinople  by  the  Greeks  in 
1261.     Jealous  of  the  Venetians,  by  whose  arms  the  Latin 
emperors  had  been  placed,  and  were  still  maintained,  on  then 
throne,  the  Genoese  assisted  Palreologus  in  overturning  that 
usurpation.     They  obtained  in  consequence  the  suburb  of 
Pera  or  Galata,  over  against  Constantinople,  as  an  exclusive 
settlement,  where  their  colony  was  ruled  by  a  magistrate  sent 
from  home,  and  frequently  defied  the  Greek  capital  with  its 
armed  galleys  and  intrepid  seamen.     From  this  convenient 
station  Genoa  extended  her  commerce  into  the  Black  Sea, 
and  established  her  principal  factory  at  CafFa,  in  the  Crimean 
peninsula.     This  commercial  monopoly,  for  such  she  endeav- 
ored  to   render   it,  aggravated   the   animosity  of  andVenice 
Venice.     As  Pisa  retired  from  the  field  of  waters, 
a  new  enemy  appeared  upon  the  horizon  to  dispute  the  mari- 
time dominion  of  Genoa.     Her  first  war  with  Venice  was  in 
'.258.     The  second  was  not  till  after  the  victory  of  Meloria 
had  crushed  her  more  ancient  enemy.     It  broke  out  in  1293, 
and  was  prosecuted  with  determined  fury  and  a  great  display 
of  naval  strength  on  both  sides.     One  Genoese  armament, 
as  we  are  assured  by  an  historian,  consisted  of  one  hundred 
and  fifty-five  galleys,  each  manned  with  from  two  hundred 
and  twenty  to  three  hundred  sailors  ; l  a  force  astonishing  to 
those  who  know  the  more  slender  resources  of  Italy  in  mod- 
ern times,  but  which  is  rendered  credible  by  several  analogous 
facts  of  good  authority.     It  was,  however,  beyond  any  other 
exertion.     The  usual  fleets  of  Genoa  and  Venice  were  of 
seventy  to  ninety  galleys. 

Perhaps  the  naval  exploits  of  these  two  republics  may 
afford  a  more  interesting  spectacle  to  some  minds  than  any 
other  part  of  Italian  history.  Compared  with  military  trans- 
actions of  the  same  age,  they  are  more  sanguinary,  more 
brilliant,  and  exhibit  full  as  much  skill  and  intrepidity.  But 
maritime  warfare  is  scanty  in  circumstances,  and  the  indefi- 
niteness  of  its  locality  prevents  it  from  resting  in  the  memory. 
And  though  the  wars  of  Genoa  and  Venice  were  not  always 
*o  unconnected  with*  territorial  politics  as  those  of  the  former 

i  Muratori,  a.d.  1295 


428  GENOA.  Chap.  III.  l»ABr  a 

city  with  Pisa,  yet,  from  the  alternation  of  success  and  equal- 
ity of  forces,  they  did  not  often  produce  any  decisive  effect. 
One  memorable  encounter  in  the  Sea  of  Marmora,  where 
the  Genoese  fought  and  conquered  single-handed  against  the 
Venetians,  the  Catalans,  and  the  Greeks,  hardly  belongs  to 
Italian  history.1 

But  the  most  remarkable  war,  and  that  productive  of  the 
1352        greatest  consequences,  was  one  that  commenced  in 
War  of  1378,  after  several  acts  of  hostility  in  the  Levant, 

Chioggia.  wherein  the  Venetians  appear  to  have  been  the 
principal  aggressors.  Genoa  did  not  stand  alone  in  this  war. 
A  formidable  confederacy  was  raised  against  Venice,  who 
had  given  provocation  to  many  enemies.  Of  this  Francis 
Carrara,  signor  of  Padua,  and  the  king  of  Hungary  were  the 
leaders.  But  the  principal  struggle  was,  as  usual,  upon  the 
waves.  During  the  winter  of  1378  a  Genoese  fleet  kept  the 
sea,  and  ravaged  the  shores  of  Dalmatia.  The  Venetian 
armament  had  been  weakened  by  an  epidemic  disease,  and 
when  Vittor  Pisani,  their  admiral,  gave  battle  to  the  enemy, 
he  was  compelled  to  fight  with  a  hasty  conscription  of  lands- 
men against  the  best  sailors  in  the  world.  Entirely  defeated, 
ind  taking  refuge  at  Venice  with  only  seven  galleys,  Pisani 
was  cast  into  prison,  as  if  his  ill  fortune  had  been  his  crime. 
Meanwhile  the  Genoese  fleet,  augmented  by  a  strong  rein 
forcement,  rode  before  the  long  natural  ramparts  that  separate 
the  lagunes  of  Venice  from  the  Adriatic.  Six  passages  in- 
tersect the  islands  which  constitute  this  barrier,  besides  the 
broader  outlets  of  Brondolo  and  Fossone,  through  which  the 
waters  of  the  Brenta  and  the  Adige  are  discharged.  The 
lagune  itself,  as  is  well  known,  consists  of  extremely  shallow 
water,  unnavigable  for  any  vessel  except  along  the  course 
of  artificial  and  intricate  passages.  Notwithstanding  the  ap- 
parent difficulties  of  such  an  enterprise,  Pietro  Doria,  the 
Genoese  admiral,  determined  to  reduce  the  city.  His  first 
successes  gave  him  reason  to  hope.  He  forced  the  passage, 
and  stormed  the  little  town  of  Chioggia,'2  built  upon  the  inside 
of  the  isle  bearing  that  name,  about  twenty-five  miles  south 
of  Venice.  Nearly  four  thousand  prisoners  fell  here  into 
his    hands:    an  augury,  as  it  seemed,  of   a  more  splendid 

i  Gibbon,  c.  63.  of  tbe  Venetian  dialect,  which  changei 

3  Chioggia,   known  at  Venice  by  the    the  g  into  z. 
name  of  Chioza,  according  to  the  usage 


Italy.  HER   WARS.  429 

triumph.  In  the  consternation  this  misfortune  inspired  at 
Venice  the  first  impulse  was  to  ask  for  peace.  The  ambas- 
sadors carried  with  them  seven  Genoese  prisoners,  as  a  sort 
of  peace-offering  to  the  admiral,  and  were  empowered  to 
make  large  and  humiliating  concessions,  reserving  nothing 
but  the  liberty  of  Venice.  Francis  Carrara  strongly  urged 
his  allies  to  treat  for  peace.  But  the  Genoese  were  stimu 
lated  by  long  hatred,  and  intoxicated  by  this *  unexpected 
opportunity  of  revenge.  Doria,  calling  the  ambassadors 
into  council,  thus  addressed  them :  "  Ye  shall  obtain  no 
peace  from  us,  I  swear  to  you,  nor  from  the  lord  of  Padua, 
till  first  we  have  put  a  curb  in  the  mouths  of  those  wild 
horses  that  stand  upon  the  place  of  St.  Mark.  When  they 
are  bridled  you  shall  have  enough  of  peace.  Take  back 
with  you  your  Genoese  captives,  for  I  am  coming  within  a 
few  days  to  release  both  them  and  their  companions  from 
your  prisons."  When  this  answer  was  reported  to  the 
senate,  they  prepared  to  defend  themselves  with  the  charac- 
teristic firmness  of  their  government.  Every  eye  was  turned 
towards  a  great  man  unjustly  punished,  their  admiral  Vittor 
Pisani.  He  was  called  out  of  prison  to  defend  his  country 
amidst  general  acclamations ;  but,  equal  in  magnanimity  and 
simple  republican  patriotism  to  the  noblest  characters  of 
antiquity,  Pisani  repressed  the  favoring  voices  of  the  multi- 
tude, and  bade  them  reserve  their  enthusiasm  for  St.  Mark, 
the  symbol  and  war-cry  of  Venice.  Under  the  vigorous 
command  of  Pisani  the  canals  were  fortified  or  occupied  by 
large  vessels  armed  with  artillery ;  thirty-four  galleys  were 
equipped  ;  every  citizen  contributed  according  to  his  power ; 
in  the  entire  want  of  commercial  resources  (for  Venice  had 
not  a  merchant-ship  during  this  war)  private  plate  was 
melted ;  and  the  senate  held  out  the  promise  of  ennobling 
thirty  families  who  should  be  most  forward  in  this  strife  of 
patriotism. 

The  new  fleet  was  so  ill  provided  with  seamen  that  for 
some  months  the  admiral  employed  them  only  in  manajuv- 
ring  along  the  canals.  From  some  unaccountable  supine- 
ness,  or  more  probably  from  the  insuperable  difficulties  of  the 
undertaking,  the  Genoese  made  no  assault  upon  the  city. 
They  had,  indeed,  fair  grounds  to  hope  its  reduction  by 
famine  or  despair.  Every  access  to  the  continent  was  cut 
off  by  the  troops  of  Padua ;  and  the  king  of  Hungary  had 


130  WARS   OF  GENOA.  Chap.  III.  Pakt  II 

mastered  almost  all  the  Venetian  towns  in  Istria  and  along 
the  Dalmatian  coast.     The  doge  Contarini,  taking  the  chief 
command,  appeared  at  length  with  his  fleet  near  Chioggia, 
before  the  Genoese  were  aware.     They  were  still  less  aware 
of  his   secret  design.     He  pushed  one  of  the  large   round 
vessels,  then  called  cocche,  into  the  narrow  passage  of  Chiog- 
gia which  connects  the  lagune  with  the  sea,  and,  mooring  her 
athwart  the    channel,  interrupted  that  communication.     At- 
tacked with  fury  by  the  enemy,  this  vessel  went  down  on  the 
spot,  and  the  doge  improved  his  advantage  by  .-inking  loads 
of  stones  until  the  passage  became  absolutely  unnavigable. 
It  was  still  possible  for  the  Genoese  fleet  to  follow  the  prin- 
cipal canal  of  the  lagune  towards  Venice  and  the  northern 
passages,  or  to  sail  out  of  it  by  the  harbor  of  Brondolo ;  but, 
whether  from  confusion  or  from  miscalculating  the  dangers 
of  their  position,   they  suffered   the   Venetians   to  close   the 
canal  upon  them  by  the  same  mean?  they  had  used  at  Chiog- 
gia, and  even  to  place  their  fleet  in  the  entrance  of  Brondolo 
so  near  to  the  lagune  that  the  Genoese  could  not  form  their 
ships  in  line  of  battle.     The  circumstances  of  the  two  com- 
batants were  thus  entirely  changed.     But  the  Genoese  fleet, 
though  besieged  in   Chioggia,  was    impregnable,   and  their 
command  of  the  land  secured  them  from  famine.     Venice, 
notwithstanding  her  unexpected  success,  was  still  very  far 
from  secure ;  it  was  difficult  for  the  doge  to  keep  his  position 
through  the  winter ;  and  if  the  enemy  could  appear  in  open 
sea,  the   risks  of  combat  were  extremely  hazardous.     It  is 
said  that  the  senate  deliberated  upon  transporting  the  seat  of 
their  liberty  to  Candia,  and  that  the  doge  had  announced  his 
intention  to  raise  the  siege  of  Chioggia,  if  expected  succors 
did  not  arrive  by  the  1st  of  January,  1380.     On  that  very 
day  Carlo  Zeno,  an  admiral  who,  ignorant  of  the  dangers  of 
his  country,  had  been  supporting  the  honor,  of  her  flag  in  the 
Levant  and  on  the  coast  of  Liguria,  appeared  with  a  rein- 
forcement of  eighteen   galleys    and   a  store   of  provisions. 
From  that  moment  the  confidence  of  Venice  revived.     The 
fleet,  now  superior  in  strength  to  the  enemy,  began  to  attack 
them  with  vivacity.     After  several  months  of  obstinate  re 
sistance  the  Genoese,  whom  their  republic  had  ineffectually 
attempted  to  relieve  by  a  fresh  armament,  blocked  up  in  the 
town  cf  Chioggia,  and  pressed  by  hunger,  were  obliged  to 
surrenc  er.     Nineteen  galleys  only  out  of  forty-eight  were  in 


Italt.  HER  GOVERNMENT..  43  j 

good  condition ;  and  the  crews  were  equally  diminished  in 
the  ten  months  of  their  occupation  of  Chioggia.  The  pride 
of  Genoa  was  deemed  to  be  justly  humbled ;  and  even  her 
own  historian  confesses  that  God  would  not  suffer  so  noble  a 
city  as  Venice  to  become  the  spoil  of  a  conqueror.1 

Each  of  the  two  republics  had  sufficient  reason  to  lament 
their  mutual  prejudices,  and  the  selfish  cupidity  of  their  mer- 
chants, which  usurps  in  all  maritime  countries  the  name  of 
patriotism.  Though  the  capture  of  Chioggia  did  not  termi- 
nate the  war,  both  parties  were  exhausted,  and  willing,  next 
year,  to  accept  the  mediation  of  the  duke  of  Savoy.  By  the 
peace  of  Turin,  Venice  surrendered  most  of  her  territorial 
possessions  to  the  king  of  Hungary.  That  prince  and 
Francis  Carrara  were  the  only  gainers.  Genoa  obtained  the 
isle  of  Tenedos,  one  of  the  original  subjects  of  dispute ;  a 
poor  indemnity  for  her  losses.  Though,  upon  a  hasty  view, 
the  result  of  this  war  appears  more  unfavorable  to  Venice, 
yet  in  fact  it  is  the  epoch  of  the  decline  of  Genoa.  From 
this  time  she  never  commanded  the  ocean  with  such  navies 
as  before ;  her  commerce  gradually  went  into  decay  ;  and 
the  fifteenth  century,  the  most  splendid  in  the  annals  of 
Venice,  is,  till  recent  times,  the  most  ignominious  in  those  of 
Genoa.  But  this  was  partly  owing  to  internal  dissensions, 
by  which  her  liberty,  as  well  as  glory,  was  for  a  while  sus- 
pended. 

At  Genoa,  as  in  other  cities  of  Lombardy,  the  principal 
magistrates  of  the  republic  were  originally  styled  Government 
Consuls.  A  chronicle  drawn  up  under  the  inspec-  of  Genoa- 
tion  of  the  senate  perpetuates  the  names  of  these  early 
magistrates.  It  appears  that  their  number  varied  from  four 
to  six,  annually  elected  by  the  people  in  their  full  parlia- 
ment. These  consuls  presided  over  the  republic  and  com- 
manded the  forces  by  land  and  sea ;  while  another  class  of 
magistrates,  bearing  the  same  title,  were  annually  elected  by 
the  several  companies  into  which  the  people  were  divided, 
for  the  administration  of  civil  justice.2  This  was  the  regi- 
men of  the  twelfth  century ;  but  in  the  next  Genoa  fell  into 
the  fashion  of  intrusting  the   executive  power  to  a  foreign 

i  G.  Stella,   Annates   Genuenses ;   Ga-  Sismondi's   narrative  is  very  clear  and 

taro,  Istoria  Padovana.     Both  these  con-  .spirited.  —  Hist,  des  Republ.  Ital.  t.  vtf 

temporary   works,   of   which   the  latter  p.  205-232. 
gives  the  best  relation,  are  in  the  seven         2  Sismondi,  t.  i.  p.  353. 
teenth  volume  of  Muratori's  collection. 


432  GOVERNMENT  OF  GENOA.    Chap.  in.  Part  IX. 

podesta.  The  podesta  was  assisted  by  a  council  of  eight, 
chosen  by  the  eight  companies  of  nobility.  This  institution, 
if  indeed  it  were  anything  more  than  a  custom  or  usurpation, 
originated  probably  not  much  later  than  the  beginning  of 
the  thirteenth  century.  It  gave  not  only  an  aristocratic,  but 
almost  an  oligarchical  character  to  the  constitution,  since 
many  of  the  nobility  were  not  members  of  these  eight  socie- 
ties. Of  the  senate  or  councils  we  hardly  know  more  than 
their  existence ;  they  are  very  little  mentioned  by  historians. 
Everything  of  a  general  nature,  everything  that  required  the 
expression  of  public  will,  was  reserved  for  the  entire  and  un- 
represented sovereignty  of  the  people.  In  no  city  was  the 
parliament  so  often  convened ;  for  war,  for  peace,  for  al- 
liance, for  change  of  government.1  These  very  dissonant 
elements  were  not  likely  to  harmonize.  The  people,  suf- 
ficiently accustomed  to  the  forms  of  democracy  to  imbibe  its 
spirit,  repined  at  the  practical  influence  which  was  thrown 
into  the  scale  of  the  nobles.  Nor  did  some  of  the  latter  class 
scruple  to  enter  that  path  of  ambition  which  leads  to  power 
by  flattery  of  the  populace.  Two  or  three  times  within  the 
thirteenth  century  a  high-born  demagogue  had  nearly  over- 
turned the  general  liberty,  like  the  Torriani  at  Milan,  through 
the  pretence  of  defending  that  of  individuals.2  Among  the 
nobility  themselves  four  houses  were  distinguished  beyond 
all  the  rest  —  the  Grimaldi,  the  Fieschi,  the  Doria,  the  Spi- 
nola ;  the  two  former  of  Guelf  politics,  the  latter  adherents 
of  the  empire.8  Perhaps  their  equality  of  forces,  and  a  jeal- 
ousy which  even  the  families  of  the  same  faction  entertained 
of  each  other,  prevented  any  one  from  usurping  the  signiory 
at  Genoa.  Neither  the  Guelf  nor  Ghibelin  party  obtaining  a 
decided  preponderance,  continual  revolutions  occurred  in  the 
city.  The  most  celebrated  was  the  expulsion  of  the  Ghibe- 
lins  under  the  Doria  and  Spinola  in  1318.  They  had  re- 
course to  the  Visconti  of  Milan,  and  their  own  resources 
were  not  unequal  to  cope  with  their  country.  The  Guelfs 
thought  it  necessary  to  call  in  Robert  king  of  Naples,  always 
ready  to  give  assistance  as  the  price  of  dominion,  and  con- 
ferred upon  him  the  temporary  sovereignty  of  Genoa.  A 
siege  of  several  years'  duration,  if  we  believe  an  historian  of 
that  age,  produced  as  many  remarkable  exploits  as  that  of 

1  Siamondi,  p  324 .  -  Id.  t.  iii  p.  319.  »  Id.  t.  iii.  p.  828. 


Italy.  THE  FIRST  DOGE.  433 

Troy.  They  have  not  proved  so  interesting  to  posterity 
The  Ghibelins  continued  for  a  length  of  time  excluded  from 
Jae  city,  but  in  possession  of  the  seaport  of  Savona,  whence 
they  traded  and  equipped  fleets,  as  a  rival  republic,  and  even 
entered  into  a  separate  war  with  Venice.1  Experience  of 
the  uselessness  of  hostility,  and  the  loss  to  which  they  ex- 
posed their  common  country,  produced  a  reconciliation,  or 
rather  a  compromise,  in  1331,  when  the  Ghibelins  returned 
to  Genoa.  But  the  people  felt  that  many  years  of  misfor- 
tune had  been  owing  to  the  private  enmities  of  four  over- 
bearing families.  An  opportunity  soon  offered  of  reducing 
their  influence  within  very  narrow  bounds. 

The  Ghibelin  faction  was  at  the  head  of  affairs  in  1339, 
a  Doria  and  a  Spinola  being  its  leaders,  when  the  jag^n  of 
discontent  of  a  large  fleet  in  want  of  pay  broke  the  first 
out  in  open  insurrection.  Savona  and  the  neigh-  oge' 
boring  towns  took  arms  avowedly  against  the  aristocratical 
tyranny  ;  and  the  capital  was  itself  on  the  point  of  joining 
the  insurgents.  There  was,  by  the  Genoese  constitution,  a 
magistrate  named  the  Abbot  of  the  people,  acting  as  a  kind 
of  tribune  for  their  protection  against  the  oppression  of  the 
nobility.  His  functions  are  not,  however,  in  any  book  I  have 
seen,  very  clearly  defined.  This  office  had  been  abolished  by 
the  present  government,  and  it  was  the  first  demand  of  the 
malecontents  that  it  should  be  restored.  This  was  acceded 
to,  and  twenty  delegates  were  appointed  to  make  the  choice. 
While  they  delayed,  and  the  populace  was  grown  weary  with 
waiting,  a  nameless  artisan  called  out  from  an  elevated  station 
that  he  could  direct  them  to  a  fit  person.  When  the  people, 
in  jest,  bade  him  speak  on,  he  uttered  the  name  of  Simon 
Boccanegra.  This  was  a  man  of  noble  birth,  and  well  es- 
teemed, who  was  then  present  among  the  crowd.  The  word 
was  suddenly  taken  up  ;  a  cry  was  heard  that  Boccanegra 
should  be  abbot ;  he  was  instantly  brought  forward,  and  the 
sword  of  justice  forced  into  his  hand.  As  soon  as  silence 
could  be  obtained  he  modestly  thanked  them  for  their  favor, 
but  declined  an  office  which  his  nobility  disqualified  him  from 
exercising.  At  this  a  single  voice  out  of  the  crowd  exclaimed, 
"  Signior!"  and  this  title  was  reverberated  from  every  side. 
Fearful  of  worse  consequences,  the  actual  magistrates  urged 

1  Villani,  1.  ix.  passim. 
r<>L,  1.  —  .u.  28 


434  REVOLUTIONS   OF  GENOA.     Chap.  III.  Part  II 

him  to  comply  with  the  people  and  accept  the  office  of  abbot- 
But  Boccanegra,  addressing  the  assembly,  declared  his  readi- 
ness to  become  their  abbot,  signior,  or  whatever  they  would. 
The  cry  of  "  Signior  !  "  was  now  louder  than  before ;  while 
others  cried  out,  "  Let  him  be  duke  ! "  The  latter  title  was 
received  with  greater  approbation ;  and  Boccanegra  was  con- 
ducted to  the  palace,  the  first  duke,  or  doge,  of  Genoa.1 

Caprice  alone,  or  an  idea  of  more  pomp  and  dignity,  led 
Subsequent  the  populace,  we  may  conjecture,  to  prefer  this 
revolutions.  title  w  ^}iat  0f  signior  ;  but  it  produced  important 
and  highly  beneficial  consequences.  In  all  neighboring  cities 
an  arbitrary  government  had  been  already  established  under 
their  respective  signiors ;  the  name  was  associated  with  indcr- 
inite  power,  while  that  of  doge  had  only  been  taken  by  the 
elective  and  very  limited  chief  magistrate  of  another  man- 
time  republic.  Neither  Boccanegra  nor  his  successors  ever 
rendered  their  authority  unlimited  or  hereditary.  The  con- 
stitution of  Genoa,  from  an  oppressive  aristocracy,  became 
a  mixture  of  the  two  other  forms,  with  an  exclusion  of  tne 
nobles  from  power.  Those  four  great  families  who  had  dom- 
ineered alternately  for  almost  a  century  lost  their  influence 
at  home  after  the  revolution  of  1339.  Yet,  what  is  remarka- 
ble enough,  they  were  still  selected  in  preference  for  the 
highest  of  trusts  ;  their  names  are  still  identified  with  the 
glory  of  Genoa ;  her  fleets  hardly  sailed  but  under  a  Doria, 
a  Spinola,  or  a  Grimaldi ;  such  confidence  could  the  republic 
bestow  upon  their  patriotism,  or  that  of  those  whom  they 
commanded.  Meanwhile  two  or  three  new  families,  a  ple- 
beian oligarchy,  filled  their  place  in  domestic  honors  ;  the 
Adorni,  the  Fregosi,  the  Montalti,  contended  for  the  ascend- 
ant. From  their  competition  ensued  revolutions  too  numer- 
ous almost  for  a  separate  history;  in  four  years,  from  1390 
to  1394,  the  doge  was  ten  times  changed;  swept  away  or 
brought  back  in  the  fluctuations  of  popular  tumult.  Antoni- 
otto  Adorno,  four  times  doge  of  Genoa,  had  sought  the  friend- 
ship of  Gian  Galeazzo  Visconti ;  but  that  crafty  tyrant 
meditated  the  subjugation  of  the  republic,  and  played  her 
factions  against  one  another  to  render  her  fall  secure.  Adorno 
perceived  that  there  was  no  hope  for  ultimate  independence 
but  by  making  a  temporary  sacrifice  of  it.     His  own  power 

1  Q.  Stella.     Annal.  Genuenses,  In  Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  xvii.  p.  107'i 


Italy. 


VENICE.  485 


ambitious  as  he  had  been,  he  voluntarily  resigned,  and  placed 
the  republic  under  the  protection  or  signiory  of  the  king  of 
France.  Terms  were  stipulated  very  favorable  to  her  liber- 
ties ;  but,  with  a  French  garrison  once  received  into  the  city, 
they  were  not  always  sure  of  observance.1 

While  Genoa  lost  even  her  political  independence,  Venice 
became  more  conspicuous  and  powerful  than  be-  Venice 
fore.  That  famous  republic  deduces  its  origi- 
nal, and  even  its  liberty,  from  an  era  beyond  the  com- 
mencement of  the  middle  ages.  The  Venetians  boast  of  a 
perpetual  emancipation  from  the  yoke  of  barbarians.  From 
that  ignominious  servitude  some  natives,  or,  as  their  histori- 
ans will  have  it,  nobles,  of  Aquileja  and  neighboring  towns,3 
tied  to  the  small  cluster  of  islands  that  rise  amidst  the  shoals 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Brenta.  Here  they  built  the  town  of 
Rivoalto,  the  modern  Venice,  in  42 1  ;  but  their  chief  settle- 
ment was,  till  the  beginning  cf  the  ninth  century,  at  Mala- 
mocco.  A  living  writer  has,  in  a  passage  of  remarkable  elo- 
quence, described  the  sovereign  republic,  immoveable  upon 
the  bosom  of  the  waters  from  which  her  palaces  emerge, 
contemplating  the  successive  tides  of  continental  invasion,  the 
rise  and  fall  of  empires,  the  change  of  dynasties,  the  whole 
moving  scene  of  human  revolution,  till,  in  her  own  turn,  the 
last  surviving  witness  of  antiquity,  the  common  link  between 
two  periods  of  civilization,  has  submitted  to  the  destroying 
hand  of  time.8  Some  part  of  this  renown  must,  on  a  cold- 
blooded scrutiny,  be  detracted  from  Venice.  Her  independ- 
ence was,  at  the  best,  the  fruit  of  her  obscurity. 

'  ,..ii  i         p  /.  i  Her  depend- 

Neglected  upon  their  islands,  a  people  ot  fasher-  enCe  on  the 
men   might    without   molestation   elect  their  own  <Jwek 

o  .  i  r,     n  •       ,      empire. 

magistrates ;  a  very  equivocal  proot  ot  sovereignty 
in  cities  much  more  considerable  than  Venice.  But  both  the 
weste:n  and  the  eastern  empire  alternately  pretended  to  ex- 
ercise dominion  over  her ;  she  was  conquered  by  Pepin,  son 
of  Charlemagne,  and  restored  by  him,  as  the  chronicles  say, 
to  the  Greek  emperor  Nicephorus.  There  is  every  appear- 
ance that  the  Venetians  had  always  considered  themselves 
as  subject,  in  a  large  sense  not  exclusive  of  their  municipal 
self-government,  to  the  eastern  empire.4     And  this  connec- 

i  Sismoudi,  t   vii.  p.  237,  367.  3  Sismondi,  t.  i.  p.  309. 

2  Kbbe  principio,  says  Sanuto  haugh-  *  Nicephorus  stipulates   with   Charle 

tily.  ncn  da  pastori,  come  ebbe  Roma,  magne  lor  his  faithful  city  of  Venice, 

uh  da  potenti,e  nobili.  Quse  in   devotione  imperii  illibatw  st* 


436  ACQUISITIONS   OF  VENICE.    Chap.  III.  Part  II 

lion  was  not  broken,  in  the  early  part,  at  least,  of  the  tenth 
century.  But,  for  every  essential  purpose,  Venice  might 
long  before  be  deemed  an  independent  state.  Her  doge  was 
not  confirmed  at  Constantinople ;  she  paid  no  tribute,  and 
Lent  no  assistance  in  war.  Her  own  navies,  in  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, encountered  the  Normans,  the  Saracens,  and  the  Scla- 
vonians  in  the  Adriatic  Sea.  Upon  the  coast  of  Dalmatia 
were  several  Greek  cities,  which  the  empire  had  ceased  to 
protect,  and  which,  like  Venice  itself,  became  republics  for 
want  of  a  master.  Bagusa  was  one  of  these,  and,  more  for- 
tunate than  the  rest,  survived  as  an  independent  city  till  out 
Conquest  of  own  age.  In  return  for  the  assistance  of  Venice, 
these  little  seaports  put  themselves  under  her  gov 
a.d.  997.  ernment ;  the  Sclavonian  pirates  were  repressed  ; 
and  after  acquiring,  partly  by  consent,  partly  by  arms,  a 
larsre  tract  of  maritime  territorv,  the  do^e  took  the  title  of  duke 
of  Dalmatia,  which  is  said  by  Dandolo  to  have  been  confirmed 
at  Constantinople.  Three  or  four  centuries,  however,  elapsed 
before  the  republic  became  secure  of  these  conquests,  which 
were  frequently  wrested  from  her  by  rebellions  of  the  inhab- 
itants, or  by  her  powerful  neighbor,  the  king  of  Hungary. 

A  more  important  source  of  Venetian  greatness  was  com- 
Her  acqui-  uierce.  In  the  darkest  and  most  barbarous  period, 
sitioasm       before  Genoa  or  even  Pisa  had  entered  into  mer- 

the  Levant.  .-.  .,       -rj-  •    j 

cantile  pursuits,  Venice  carried  on  an  extensive 
traffic  both  with  the  .Greek  and  Saracen  regions  of  the  Le- 
vant. The  crusades  enriched  and  aggrandized  Venice  more, 
perhaps,  than  any  other  city.  Her  splendor  may,  however, 
be  dated  from  the  taking  of  Constantinople  by  the  Latins  in 
1204.  In  this  famous  enterprise,  which  diverted  a  great  ar- 
mament destined  for  the  recovery  of  Jerusalem,  the  French 
and  Venetian  nations  were  alone  engaged  ;  but  the  former 
only  as  private  adventurers,  the  latter  with  the  whole  strength 

terant.    Danduli  Chronicon,  in  Muratori,  Giannone's   history,  t.  ii.   p.  283,  edit. 

Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  xii.  p.  156.     In  the  Haia.    1753.     Muratori   informs  us  that 

tenth    century    Constantine    Porphyro-  so  late  as  1084  the  doge  obtained  the  title 

genitus',  in  his  book  De  Administratione  of    Imperialis    Protosevastos    from    the 

Imperii,  claims  the  Venetians  as  his  sub-  court  of  Constantinople;    a  title  which 

jects,  though  he  admits  that  they  had,  he   continued    always    to    use.     (Annali 

for  peace  sake,  paid  tribute  to  Pepin  and  d'  [talia,  ad  mm.)     But  I  should  lay  no 

his  successors  as  kings  of  Italy,    p.  71.  stress  on  this  circumstance.     The  Greek, 

1  have  not  read  the  famous  Squittinio  like   the   German   emperors  in    modern 

iella  liberta  Veneta,  which  gave  the  re-  turn  s,    had    a   mint  of   specious1    titles 

public  so  much  offence  in  the  seventeenth  which     passed    for    ready    money    o?ei 

century  ;  but  a  very  strong  case  is  made  Christendom, 
out  against  their  early  independence  in 


h-AT/r.  HER  GOVERNMENT.  437 

of  their  republic  under  its  doge  Henry  Dandolo.  Tiiree 
eighths  of  the  city  of  Constantinople,  and  an  equal  propor- 
tion of  the  province*,  were  allotted  to  them  in  the  partition 
of  the  spoil,  and  the  doge  took  the  singular  but  accurate  title, 
Duke  of  three  eigths  of  the  Roman  empire.  Their  share 
was  increased  by  purchases  from  less  opulent  crusaders,  es- 
pecially one  of  much  importance,  the  island  of  Candia,  which 
they  retained  till  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century.  These 
foreign  acquisitions  were  generally  granted  out  in  fief  to  pri- 
vate Venetian  nobles  under  the  supremacy  of  the  republic.1 
It  was  thus  that  the  Ionian  islands,  to  adopt  the  vocabulary 
of  our  day,  came  under  the  dominion  of  Venice,  and  guar- 
anteed that  sovereignty  which  she  now  began  to  affect  over 
the  Adriatic.  Those  of  the  Archipelago  were  lost  in  the 
sixteenth  century.  This  political  greatness  was  sustained 
by  an  increasing  commerce.  No  Christian  state  preserved 
so  considerable  an  intercourse  with  the  Mohammedans, 
While  Genoa  kept  the  keys  of  the  Black  Sea  by  her  colo- 
nies of  Pera  and  Caffa,  Venice  directed  her  vessels  to  Acre 
and  Alexandria.  These  connections,  as  is  the  natural  effect 
of  trade,  deadened  the  sense  of  religious  antipathy ;  and  the 
Venetians  were  sometimes  charged  with  obstructing  all  efforts 
towards  a  new  crusade,  or  even  any  partial  attacks  upon  the 
Mohammedan  nations. 

The  earliest  form  of  government  at  Venice,  as  we  collect 
from  an  epistle  of  Ca>siodorus  in  the  sixth  century,  Venetian 
was  by  twelve  annual  tribunes.  Perhaps  the  s°vernment- 
union  of  the  different  islanders  was  merely  federative. 
However,  in  697,  they  resolved  to  elect  a  chief  magistrate 
by  name  of  duke,  or,  in  their  dialect,  doge  of  Venice. 
No  councils  appear  to  have  limited  his  power,  or  represented 
the  national  will.  The  doge  was  general  and  judge ;  he  was 
sometimes  permitted  to  associate  his  son  with  him,  and  thus 
to  prepare  the  road  for  hereditary  power  ;  his  government 
had  all  the  prerogatives,  and,  as  far  as  in  such  a  state  of 
manners  was  possible,  the  pomp,  of  a  monarchy.  But  he 
acted  in  important  matters  with  the  concurrence  of  a  general 
assembly,  though,  from  the  want  of  positive  restraints,  his 
executive  government  might  be  considered  as  nearly  abso- 
lute.    Time,   however,  demonstrated  to  the  Venetians   the 

i  Sismondi,  t.  ii.  p.  481 


438  GOVERNMENT  OF  VENICE.    Chap.  III.  I'akt  1! 

imperfections  of  such  a  constitution.  Limitations  were  ac- 
cordingly imposed  on  the  doge  in  1032  ;  he  was  prohibited 
from  associating  a  son  in  the  government,  and  obliged  to  act 
with  the  consent  of  two  elected  counsellors,  and,  on  impor- 
tant occasions,  to  call  in  some  of  the  principal  citizens.  No 
other  change  appears  to  have  taken  place  till  1172,  long 
after  every  other  Italian  city  had  provided  for  its  liberty  by 
constitutional  laws,  more  or  less  successful,  but  always  mani- 
festing a  good  deal  of  contrivance  and  complication.  Venice 
was,  however,  dissatisfied  with  her  existing  institutions. 
General  assemblies  were  found,  in  practice,  inconvenient 
and  unsatisfactory.  Yet  some  adequate  safeguard  against 
a  magistrate  of  indefinite  powers  was  required  by  freemen. 
A  representative  council,  as  in  other  republics,  justly  appear- 
ed the  best  innovation  that  could  be  introduced.1 

The  great  council  of  Venice,  as  established  in  1172,  was 
to  consist  of  four  hundred  and  eighty  citizens,  equally  taken 
from  the  six  districts  of  the  city,  and  annually  renewed.  But 
the  election  was  not  made  immediately  by  the  people.  Two 
electors,  called  tribunes,  from  each  of  the  six  districts,  ap- 
pointed the  members  of  the  council  by  separate  nomination. 
These  tribunes  at  first  were  themselves  chosen  by  the  people, 
so  that  the  intervention  of  this  electoral  body  did  not  appar- 
ently trespass  upon  the  democratical  character  of  the  consti- 
tution. But  the  great  council,  principally  composed  of  men 
of  high  birth,  and  invested  by  the  law  with  the  appointment 
of  the  doge,  and  of  all  the  councils  of  magistracy,  seem, 
early  in  the  thirteenth  century,  to  have  assumed  the  right  of 
naming  their  own  constituents.  Besides  appointing  the  trib- 
unes, they  took  upon  themselves  another  privilege,  that  of 
confirming  or  rejecting  their  successors  before  they  resigned 
their  functions.  These  usurpations  rendered  the  annual 
election  almost  nugatory ;  the  same  members  were  usually 
renewed ;  and  though  the  dignity  of  councillor  was  not  yet 
hereditary,  it  remained,  upon  the  whole,  in  the  same  families. 
In  this  transitional  state  the  Venetian  government  continued 
during  the  thirteenth  century ;  the  people  actually  debarred 

1  Sismondi,  t.  iii.  p.  287.     As  I  have  rian.     To  avoid  frequent  reference,  ttw 

never  read   the  Storia  civile  Veneta  by  principal  passages  in  Sismondi  relative  tc 

Vettor  Sandi,  in  nine  vols.  4to.,or  even  the  domestic   revolutions  of  Venice  are 

Laugier's  History  of  Venice,  my  reliance  t.  i.  p.  323,  t.  iii.  p.  287-300,  t.  iv.  p.  34^- 

has  chiefly  been  placed  on  M.  Sismondi,  370.     The  history  of  Daru  had  not  been 

who  has  made  use  of  Sandi,  the  latest,  published  when  this  was  written, 
und  probably  the  most  accurate,  bista 


Italy.  GOVERNMENT   OF  VENICE.  439 

of  power,  but  an  hereditary  aristocracy  not  completely  of 
legally  confirmed.  The  right  of  electing,  or  rather  of  re- 
electing, the  great  council  was  transferred,  in  1297,  from  the 
tribunes,  whose  office  was  abolished,  to  the  council  of  forty ; 
they  balloted  upon  the  names  of  the  members  who  already  sat ; 
and  whoever  obtained  twelve  favoring  balls  out  of  forty  re- 
tained his  place.  The  vacancies  occasioned  by  rejection  or 
death  were  tilled  up  by  a  supplemental  list  formed  by  three 
electors  nominated  in  the  great  council.  But  they  were  ex- 
pressly prohibited,  by  laws  of  1298  and  1300,  from  inserting 
the  name  of  any  one  whose  paternal  ancestors  had  not  en- 
joyed the  same  honor.  Thus  an  exclusive  hereditary  aris- 
tocracy was  finally  established.  And  the  personal  rights  of 
noble  descent  were  rendered  complete  in  1319  by  the  aboli 
tion  of  all  elective  forms.  By  the  constitution  of  Venice  as 
it  was  then  settled,  every  descendant  of  a  member  of  the 
great  council,  on  attaining  twenty-five  years  of  age,  entered 
as  of  right  into  that  body,  which,  of  course,  became  un- 
limited in  its  numbers.1 

But  an  assembly  so  numerous  as  the  great  council,  even 
before  it  was  thus  thrown  open  to  all  the  nobility,  could 
never  have  conducted  the  public  affairs  with  that  secrecy 
and  steadiness  which  were  characteristic  of  Venice  ;  and 
without  an  intermediary  power  between  the  doge  and  the 
patrician  multitude  the  constitution  would  have  gained 
nothing  in  stability  to  compensate  for  the  loss  of  popular 
freedom.  The  great  council  had  proceeded  very  soon  after 
its  institution  to  limit  the  ducal  prerogatives.  That  of  exer- 
cising criminal  justice,  a  trust  of  vast  importance,  was  trans- 
ferred in  1179  to  a  council  of  forty  members  annually 
chosen.  The  executive  government  itself  was  thought  too 
considerable  for  the  doge  without  some  material  limitations. 
Instead  of  naming  his  own  assistants  or  pregadi,  he  was 
only  to  preside  in  a  council  of  sixty  members,  to  whom  the 
care  of  the  state  in  all  domestic  and  foreign  relations,  and 

i  These  gradual  changes  between  1297  noble  had  a  right  to  take  his  seat  in  the 

and  1319  were  first  made  known  by  Sandi,  great  council.     But  the  names  of  those 

from  whom  M.  Sismondi  has  introduced  who  had  passed  the  age  of  twenty  were 

the  facts  into  his  own  history.     I  notice  annually  put  into  an  urn,  and  one  fifth 

this,  because  all  former  writers,  both  an-  drawn  out  by  lot,  who  were  thereupon 

eient  and  modern,  fix  the  complete  and  admitted.     Ou  an  average,  therefore,  th< 

final  establishment  of  the  Venetian  aris-  a.^e  of  admission  was  about  twenty-three 

tocracy  in  1297  Janotus  de  Rep.  Venet.  —  ContarinJ 

Twenty-five   years    complete   was    the  Amelot  de  la  Houssaye. 
statutable  age  at  which  every  Venetian 


440  GOVERNMENT   OF    VENICE.     Chai-.  III.  Part  1. 

the  previous  deliberation  upon  proposals  submitted  to  the 
great  council,  was  confided.  This  council  of  pregadi,  gen- 
erally called  in  later  times  the  senate,  was  enlarged  in 
the  fourteenth  century  by  sixty  additional  members ;  and 
as  a  great  part  of  the  magistrates  had  also  seats  in  it,  the 
whole  number  amounted  to  between  two  and  three  hundred. 
Though  the  legislative  power,  properly  speaking,  remained 
with  the  great  council,  the  senate  used  to  impose  taxes,  and 
had  the  exclusive  right  of  making  peace  and  war.  It  was 
annually  renewed,  like  almost  all  other  councils  at  Venice, 
by  the  great  council.  But  since  even  this  body  was  too  nu- 
merous for  the  preliminary  discussion  of  business,  six  coun- 
cillors, forming,  along  with  the  doge,  the  signiory,  or  visible 
representative  of  the  republic,  were  empowered  to  dispatch 
orders,  to  correspond  with  ambassadors,  to  treat  with  foreign 
states,  to  convoke  and  preside  in  the  councils,  and  perform 
other  duties  of  an  administration.  In  part  of  these  they 
were  obliged  to  act  with  the  concurrence  of  what  was  term- 
ed the  college,  comprising,  besides  themselves,  certain  select 
councillors,  from  different  constituted  authorities.1 

It  might  be  imagined  that  a  dignity  so  shorn  of  its  lustre 
as  that  of  doge  would  not  excite  an  overweening  ambition. 
But  the  Venetians  were  still  jealous  of  extinguished  power ; 
and  while  their  constitution  was  yet  immature,  the  great 
council  planned  new  methods  of  restricting  their  chief  mag- 
istrate. An  oath  was  taken  by  the  doge  on  his  election,  so 
comprehensive  as  to  embrace  every  possible  check  upon  un- 
due influence.  He  was  bound  not  to  correspond  with  foreign 
states,  or  to  open  their  letters,  except  in  the  presence  of  the 
signiory ;  to  acquire  no  property  beyond  the  Venetian  do- 
minions, and  to  resign  what  he  might  already  possess ;  to  in- 
terpose, directly  or  indirectly,  in  no  judicial  process ;  and  not 
to  permit  any  citizen  to  use  tokens  of  subjection  in  saluting 
him.  As  a  further  security,  they  devised  a  remarkably  com- 
plicated mode  of  supplying  the  vacancy  of  his  office.  Elec- 
tion by  open  suffrage  is  always  liable  to  tumult  or  corruption  : 
nor  does  the  method  of  secret  ballot,  while  it  prevents  the 

1  The  college  ol  Savj  consisted  of  six-  bate.     The  signiory  had  the  same  privi- 

teen  persons  ;  and  it  possessed  the  inilia-  lege.     Thus  the  virtual  powers  even  of 

five  in  all  public  measures  that  required  the  senate  were  far  more  limited  than 

the  assent  of  the  senate.     For  no  single  they  appear  at  first  sight ;  and  no  possi- 

senator,  much  less  any  noble  of  the  great  bility  remained  of  innovation  in  the  fun 

council,  could  propose  anything  for  de-  damental  principles  of  the  constitutdop 


irALY.  GOVERNMENT   OF  VENICE.  441 

one,  afford  in  practice  ai^  adequate  security  against  the 
other.  Election  by  lot  incurs  the  risk  of  placing  incapable 
persons  in  situations  of  arduous  trust.  The  Venetian  scheme 
was  intended  to  combine  the  two  modes  without  their  evils, 
by  leaving  the  absolute  choice  of  their  doge  to  electors  taken 
by  lot.  It  was  presumed  that,  among  a  competent  number 
of  persons,  though  taken  promiscuously,  good  sense  and  right 
principles  would  gain  such  an  ascendency  as  to  prevent  anv 
flagrantly  improper  nomination,  if  undue  influence  could  be 
excluded.  For  this  purpose  the  ballot  was  rendered  exceed- 
ingly complicated,  that  no  possible  ingenuity  or  stratagem 
might  ascertain  the  electoral  body  before  the  last  moment. 
A  single  lottery,  if  fairly  conducted,  is  certainly  sufficient  for 
this  end.  At  Venice  as  many  balls  as  there  were  members 
of  the  great  council  present  were  placed  in  an  urn.  Thirty 
of  these  were  gilt.  The  holders  of  gilt  balls  were  reduced 
by  a  second  ballot  to  nine.  The  nine  elected  forty,  whom 
lot  reduced  to  twelve.  The  twelve  chose  twenty-five  by 
separate  nomination.1  The  twenty-five  were  reduced  by  lot 
to  nine  ;  and  each  of  the  nine  chose  five.  These  forty-five 
were  reduced  to  eleven  as  before  ;  the  eleven  elected  forty- 
one,  who  were  the  ultimate  voters  for  a  doge.  This  intri- 
eacy  appears  useless,  and  consequently  absurd  ;  but  the  original 
principle  of  a  Venetian  election  (for  something  of  the  same 
kind  was  applied  to  all  their  councils  and  magistrates)  may 
not  always  be  unworthy  of  imitation.  In  one  of  our  best 
modern  statutes,  that  for  regulating  the  trials  of  contested 
elections,  we  have  seen  this  mixture  of  chance  and  selection 
very  happily  introduced.2 

An  hereditary  prince  could  never  have  remained  quiet  in 
such  trammels  as  were  imposed  upon  the  doge  of  Venice. 
But  early  prejudice  accustoms  men  to  consider  restraint,  even 
upon  themselves,  as  advantageous ;  and  the  limitations  of  du- 
cal power  appeared  to  every  Venetian  as  fundamental  as  the 
great  laws  of  the  English  constitution  do  to  ourselves.  Many 
doges  of  Venice,  especially  in  the  middle  ages,  were  consid- 
erable men  ;  but  they  were  content  with  the  functions  assigned 

1  Amelot  de  la  Houssaye  asserts  this:  reason  to  doubt  whether  grosser  instances 
but,  according  to  Contarini,  the  method  of  partial  or  unjust,  or  at  best  erroneous, 
was  by  ballot.  determination  have  not  taken  place  si.ics 

2  This  was  written  about  1810.  The  a  new  tribunal  was  erected,  than  could 
statute  to  which  I  allude  grew  out  of  be  imputed  to  the  celebrated  Grenvill* 
(&Yor  afterwards.    But  there  is  too  much  Act.    fl850  1 


442  GOVERNMENT   OF    VENICE    Chap.  III.  Pakt  II 

to  them,  tvhicli,  if  they  could  avoid  the  tantalizing  comparison 
of  sovereign  princes,  were  enough  for  the  ambition  of  repub- 
licans. For  life  the  chief  magistrates  of  their  country,  her 
noble  citizens  for  ever,  they  might  thank  her  in  their  own 
name  for  what  she  gave,  and  in  that  of  their  posterity  for 
what  she  withheld.  Once  only  a  doge  of  Venice  was  tempted 
1355  to  Dek*ay  tn(1  freedom  of  the  republic.  Marin 
Falieri,  a  man  far  advanced  in  life,  engaged,  from 
some  petty  resentment,  in  a  wild  intrigue  to  overturn  the 
government.  The  conspiracy  was  soon  discovered,  and  the 
doge  avowed  his  guilt.  An  aristocracy  so  firm  and  so 
severe  did  not  hesitate  to  order  his  execution  in  the  ducal 
palace. 

For  some  years  after  what  was  called  the  closing  of  the 
great  council  by  the  law  of  1296,  which  excluded  all  but  the 
families  actually  in  possession,  a  good  deal  of  discontent 
showed  itself  among  the  commonalty.  Several  commotions 
took  place  about  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century,  with 
the  object  of  restoring  a  more  popular  regimen.  Upon  the 
suppression  of  the  last,  in  1310,  the  aristocracy  sacrificed  their 
own  individual  freedom,  along  with  that  of  the  people,  to  the 
preservation  of  an  imaginary  privilege.  They  established 
the  famous  council  of  ten,  that  most  remarkable  part  of  the 
Venetian  constitution.  This  council,  it  should  be  observed, 
consisted  in  fact  of  seventeen,  comprising  the  signiory,  or  the 
doge  and  his  six  councillors,  as  well  as  the  ten  properly  so 
called.  The  council  of  ten  had  by  usage,  if  not  by  right,  a 
controlling  and  dictatorial  power  over  the  senate  and  other 
magistrates,  rescinding  their  decisions,  and  treating  separately 
with  foreign  princes.  Their  vast  influence  strengthened  the 
executive  government,  of  which  they  formed  a  part,  and 
gave  a  vigor  to  its  movements  which  the  jealousy  of  the 
councils  would  possibly  have  impeded.  But  they  are  chiefly 
known  as  an  arbitrary  and  inquisitorial  tribunal,  the  standing 
tyranny  of  Venice.  Excluding  the  old  council  of  forty,  a 
regular  court  of  criminal  judicature,  not  only  from  the  inves- 
tigation of  treasonable  charges  but  of  several  other  crimes 
of  magnitude,  they  inquired,  they  judged,  they  punished,  ac- 
cording to  what  they  called  reason  of  state.  The  public  eye 
never  penetrated  the  mystery  of  their  proceedings  ;  the  ac- 
cused was  sometimes  not  heard,  never  confronted  with  wit- 
nesses ;  the    condemnation    was    secret  as    the    inquiry,    the 


J/taly.  GOVERNMENT   OF  VENICE.  44S 

puuishment  undivulged  like  both.1  The  terrible  and  odious  ma- 
chinery of  a  police,  the  insidious  spy,  the  stipendiary  informer, 
unknown  to  the  carelessness  of  feudal  governments,  found  their 
natural  soil  in  the  republic  of  Venice.  Tumultuous  assem- 
blies were  scarcely  possible  in  so  peculiar  a  city  ;  and  private 
conspiracies  never  failed  to  be  detected  by  the  vigilance  cf 
the  council  of  ten.  Compared  with  the  Tuscan  republics  the 
tranquillity  of  Venice  is  truly  striking.  The  names  of  Guelf 
and  Ghibelin  hardly  raised  any  emotion  in  her  streets,  though 
the  government  was  considered  in  the  first  part  of  the  four- 
teenth century  as  rather  inclined  towards  the  latter  party.3 
But  the  wildest  excesses  of  faction  are  less  dishonoring  than 
the  stillness  and  moral  degradation  of  servitude.8 

It  was  a  very  common  theme  with  political  writers  till 
about  the  beginning  of  the  last  century,  when  Venice  fell 
almost  into  oblivion,  to  descant  upon  the  wisdom  of  this  gov- 
ernment. And,  indeed,  if  the  preservation  of  ancient  insti- 
tutions be,  as  some  appear  to  consider  it,  not  a  means  but  an 
end,  and  an  end  for  which  the  rights  of  man  and  laws  of 
God  may  at  any  time  be  set  aside,  we  must  acknowledge  that 
it  was  a  wisely  constructed  system.  Formed  to  compress  the 
two  opposite  forces  from  which  resistance  might  be  expected, 
it  kept  both  the  doge  and  the  people  in  perfect  subordination. 
Even  the  coalition  of  an  executive  magistrate  with  the  multi- 
tude, so  fatal  to  most  aristocracies,  never  endangered  that  of 
Venice.  It  is  most  remarkable  that  a  part  of  the  constitution 
which  destroyed  every  man's  security,  and  incurred  general 
hatred,  was  still  maintained  by  a  sense  of  its  necessity.  The 
council  of  ten,  annually  renewed,  might  annually  have  beer, 
annihilated.     The  great  council  had  only  to  withhold  their 

1  Ilium  etiaui  rnorein  observant,  ne  tian  government:  but  Daru  informs  us 
reum,  cum  de  eo  judicium  laturi  sunt,  it  was  by  a  law  enacted  in  1400.  Hist. 
In  collegium  admittant,  neque  cognito-  de  Venise,  1.  589.  It  is  noticed  by  Ame- 
rem,  aut  oratorem  quempiam,  qui  ejus  lot  de  la  Houssaye,  who  tells  us  also,  as 
causam  agat.     Contarini  de  Rep.  Venet.  Dai-u  does,  that  tbe  nobility  evaded  the 

2  Villani  several  times  speaks  of  the  law  by  secret  partnership  with  the  privi- 
Venetians  as  regular  Ghibelius.  1.  ix.  c.  leged  merchants  or  cittadini,  who  formed 
2,  1.  x.  c.  89,  &c.  But  this  is  put  much  a  separate  class  at  Venice.  This  was  the 
too  strongly  :  though  their  government  custom  in  modern  times.  But  I  have 
may  have  had  a  slight  bias  towards  that  never  understood  the  principle  or  com- 
faction,  they  were  in  reality  neutral,  and  mon  sense  of  such  a  restriction,  espe- 
far  enough  removed  from  any  domestic  daily  combined  with  that  other  funda- 
feuds  upon  that  score.  mental  law  which  disqualified  a  Venetian 

3  By  the  modern  law  of  Venice  a  noble-  nobleman  from  possessing  a  landed  estate 
man  could  not  engage  in  trade  without  on  the  terra  firma  of  the  republic.  The 
derogating  from  his  rank :  I  do  not  find  latter,  however,  did  not  extend,  as  I  have 
this  peculiarity  observed  by  Jannotti  and  been  informed,  to  Dahnatia,  or  fie  Ioniau 
Contarini.  the  oldest  writers  on  the  Vene-  islands 


444  GOVERNMENT  OF  VENICE.     CiiAr   III.  i^ft  U 

suffrages  from  the  new  candidate-,  and  the  tyranny  expired 
of  itself.  This  was  several  times  attempted  (I  speak  now  of 
more  modern  ages)  ;  but  the  nobles,  though  detesting  the 
council  of  ten,  never  steadily  persevered  in  refusing  to  re- 
elect it.  It  was,  in  fact,  become  essential  to  Venice.  So  great 
were  the  vices  of  her  constitution  that  she  could  not  endure 
their  remedies.  If  the  council  of  ten  had  been  abolished  at 
any  time  since  the  fifteenth  century,  if  the  removal  of  that 
jealous  despotism  had  given  scope  to  the  corruption  of  a  poor 
and  debased  aristocracy,  to  the  license  of  a  people  unworthy 
of  freedom,  the  republic  would  have  soon  lost  her  territorial 
possessions,  if  not  her  own  independence.  If,  indeed,  it  be 
true,  as  reported,  that  during  the  last  hundred  years  this  for- 
midable tribunal  had  sensibly  relaxed  its  vigilance,  if  the  Ve- 
netian government  had  become  less  tyrannical  through  sloth 
or  decline  of  national  spirit,  our  conjecture  will  have  acquired 
the  confirmation  of  experience.  Experience  has  recently 
shown  that  a  worse  calamity  than  domestic  tyranny  might 
befall  the  queen  of  the  Adriatic.  In  the  Place  of  St.  Mark, 
among  the  monuments  of  extinguished  greatness,  a  traveller 
may  regret  to  think  that  an  insolent  German  soldiery  has  re- 
placed even  the  senators  of  Venice.  Her  ancient  liberty,  her 
bright  and  romantic  career  of  glory  in  countries  so  dear  to  the 
imagination,  her  magnanimous  defence  in  the  war  of  Chiog- 
gia,  a  few  thinly  scattered  names  of  illustrious  men,  will  rise 
upon  his  mind,  and  mingle  with  his  indignation  at  the  treach- 
ery which  robbed  her  of  her  independence.  But  if  he  has 
learned  the  true  attributes  of  wisdom  in  civil  policy,  he  will 
not  easily  prostitute  that  word  to  a  constitution  formed  without 
reference  to  property  or  to  population,  that  vested  sovereign 
power  partly  in  a  body  of  impoverished  nobles,  partly  in  an 
overruling  despotism  ;  or  to  a  practical  system  of  government 
that  made  vice  the  ally  of  tyranny,  and  sought  impunity  for 
its  own  assassinations  by  encouraging  dissoluteness  of  private 
life.  Perhaps,  too,  the  wisdom  so  often  imputed  to  the  sen- 
ate in  its  foreign  policy  has  been  greatly  exaggerated.  The 
balance  of  power  established  in  Europe,  and  above  all  in  Italy, 
maintained  for  the  two  last  centuries  states  of  small  intrinsic 
resources,  without  any  efforts  of  their  own.  In  the  ultimate 
crisis,  at  least,  of  Venetian  liberty,  that  solemn  mockery  of 
statesmanship  was  exhibited  to  contempt ;  too  blind  to  avert 
danger,  too  cowardly  to  withstand  it,  the  most  ancient  gov- 


Italy.  STATE  OF   LOMBARD*.  445 

eminent  of  Europe  made  not  an  instant's  resistance ;  the 
peasants  of  Underwald  died  upon  their  mountains  ;  the  nobles 
of  Venice  clung  only  to  their  lives.1 

Until  almost  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century  Venice 
had  been  content  without  any  territorial  possessions  in  Italy; 
unless  we  reckon  a  very  narrow  strip  of  sea-coast,  bordering 
on  her  lagunes,  called  the  Dogato.  Neutral  in  Territorial 
the  great  contests  between  the  church  and  the  acquisitions 
empire,  between  the  free  cities  and  their  sover-  ° 
eigns,  she  was  respected  by  both  parties,  while  neither  ven- 
tured to  claim  her  as  an  ally.  But  the  rapid  progress  of 
Mastiuo  della  Scala.  lord  of  Verona,  with  some  particular 
injuries,  led  the  senate  to  form  a  league  with  Florence 
against  him.  Villani  mentions  it  as  a  singular  honor  for  his 
country  to  have  become  the  confederate  of  the  Venetians, 
"  who,  for  their  great  excellence  and  power,  had  never  allied 
themselves  with  any  state  or  prince,  except  at  their  ancient 
conquest  of  Constantinople  and  Romania."  2  The  result  of 
this  combination  was  to  annex  the  district  of  Treviso  to  the 
Venetian  dominions.  But  they  made  no  further  conquests 
in  that  age.  On  the  contrary,  they  lost  Treviso  in  the 
unfortunate  war  of  Chioggia,  and  did  not  regain  it  till  1389. 
Nor  did  they  seriously  attempt  to  withstand  the  progress  of 
Gian  Galeazzo  Visconti,  who,  after  overthrowing  the  family 
of  Scala,  stretched  almost  to   the  Adriatic,  and  altogether 

7  O 

subverted  for  a  time  the  balance  of  power  in  Lombardy. 
But  upon  the  death  of  this  prince,  in   1404,  a  remarkable 
crisis  took  place  in  that   country.      He  left  two  state  of 
sons,   Giovanni    Maria  and   Filippo   Maria,  both  ^^rdy 
young,  and  under  the  care  of  a  mother  who  was  beginning 
little  fitted  for  her  situation.     Through  her  mis-  fifteenth 
conduct  and  the  selfish  ambition  of  some  military  century. 

1  The  circumstances  to  which  Venice  doge  himself  lies  in  that  of  the  Jesuit* 
was  reduced  in  her  last  agony  by  the  The  words  Manini  Cineres  may  be  rea<i 
violence  and  treachery  of  Napoleon,  and  in  both,  which  probably  was  the  causj 
the  apparent  impossibility  of  an  effective  of  my  forgetfulness.  [1850.] 
resistance,  so  fully  described  by  Daru,  See  in  the  Edinburgh  Review,  vol.  xli 
and  still  better  by  Botta,  induce  me  to  p.  379,  an  account  of  a  book  which  is, 
modify  the  severity  of  this  remark.  Tn  perhaps,  little  kuown,  though  interest- 
former  editions  I  have  by  mistake  said  ing  to  the  history  of  our  own  age  :  a  col- 
that  the  last  doge  of  Venice,  Manini,  is  lection  of  documents  illustrating  the  fall 
buried  ir.  the  church  of  the  Scalzi,  with  of  the  republic  of  Venice.  The  article  is 
the  inscription  on  tht  stone,  Manini  well  written,  and,  I  presume,  contains  a 
Cineres.  This  church  was  indeed  built  faithful  account  of  the  work  ;  the  author 
by  the  contributions  of  several  noble  of  which,  Bignor  Barzoni,  is  respected  a* 
families,  among  them  the  Manini,  most  a  patriotic  writer  in  Italy 
of  whom  are  interred  there  ;  buf  the  last  2  L,  xi.  c  49. 


446  STATE  OF  LOMBARDY.    CiiAr.  Ill    Pakt  n 

leaders,  who  had  commanded  Gian  Galeazzo's  mercenaries 
that  extensive  dominion  was  soon  broken  into  fragments. 
Bergamo,  Como,  Lodi,  Cremona,  and  other  cities  revolted, 
submitting  themselves  in  general  to  the  families  of  their 
former  princes,  the  earlier  race  of  usurpers,  who  had  for 
nearly  a  century  been  crushed  by  the  Visconti.  A  Guelf 
faction  revived  after  the  name  had  long  been  proscribed  in 
Lombardy.  Francesco  da  Carrara,  lord  of  Padua,  availed 
himself  of  this  revolution  to  get  possession  of  Verona,  and 
seemed  likely  to  unite  all  the  cities  beyond  the  Adige.  No 
family  was  so  odious  to  the  Venetians  as  that  of  Carrara. 
Though  they  had  seemed  indifferent  to  the  more  real  danger 
in  Gian  Galeazzo's  lifetime,  they  took  up  arms  against  this 
inferior  enemy.  Both  Padua  and  Verona  were  reduced, 
and,  the  duke  of  Milan  ceding  Vicenza,  the  republic  of 
Venice  came  suddenly  into  the  possession  of  an  extensive 
territory.  Francesco  da  Carrara,  who  had  surrendered  in 
his  capital,  was  put  to  death  in  prison  at  Venice. 

Notwithstanding  the  deranged  condition  of  the  Milanese, 
no  further  attempts  were  made  by  the  senate  of  Venice  for 
twenty  years.  They  had  not  yet  acquired  that  decided  love 
of  war  and  conquest  which  soon  began  to  influence  thein 
against  all  the  rules  of  their  ancient  policy.  There  were  still 
left  some  wary  statesmen  of  the  old  school  to  check  ambitious 
designs.  Sanuto  has  preserved  an  interesting  account  of 
the  wealth  and  commerce  of  Venice  in  those  days.  This  is 
thrown  into  the  mouth  of  the  Doge  Mocenigo,  whom  he 
represents  as  dissuading  his  country,  with  his  dying  words, 
from  undertaking  a  war  against  Milan.  "  Through  peace 
our  city  has  every  year,"  he  said,  "  ten  millions  of  ducats 
employed  as  mercantile  capital  in  different  parts  of  the 
world;  the  annual  profit  of  our  traders  upon  this  sum 
amounts  to  four  millions.  Our  housing  is  valued  at  7,000,000 
ducats :  its  annual  rental  at  500,000.  Three  thousand  mer- 
chant-ships carry  on  our  trade ;  forty-three  galleys  and  three 
hundred  smaller  vessels,  manned  by  19,000  sailors,  secure 
our  naval  power.  Our  mint  has  coined  1,000,000  ducats 
within  the  year.  From  the  Milanese  dominions  alone  we 
draw  1,654,000  ducats  in  coin,  and  the  value  of  900,000 
more  in  cloths ;  our  profit  upon  this  traffic  may  be  reckoned 
at  600,000  ducats.  Proceeding  as  you  have  done  to  acquire 
this  wealth,  you  will  become  masters  of  all  the  gold  in  Chris- 


Italy.  WARS   OF   MILAN   AXD   VENICE.  447 

Lendom ;  but  war,  and  especially  unjust  war,  will  lead  infal- 
libly to  ruin.  Already  you  have  spent  900,000  ducats  in  the 
acquisition  of  Verona  and  Padua ;  yet  the  expense  of  pro- 
tecting these  places  absorbs  all  the  revenue  which  they  yield. 
You  have  many  among  you,  men  of  probity  and  experience ; 
choose  one  of  these  to  succeed  me  ;  but  beware  of  Francesco 
Foscari.  If  he  is  doge,  you  will  soon  have  war,  and  war 
will  bring  poverty  and  loss  of  honor."  '  Mocenigo  died,  and 
Foscari  became  doge :  the  prophecies  of  the  former  were 
neglected ;  and  it  cannot  wholly  be  affirmed  that  they  were 
fulfilled.  Yet  Venice  is  described  by  a  writer  thirty  years 
later  as  somewhat  impaired  in  opulence  by  her  long  warfare 
with  the  dukes  of  Milan. 

The  latter  had  recovered  a  great  part  of  their  dominions 
as  rapidly  as  they  had  lost  them.  Giovanni  Maria,  Wars  of 
the  elder  brother,  a  monster  of  guilt  even  among  Milan  and 
the  Visconti,  having  been  assassinated,  Filippo 
Maria  assumed  the  government  of  Milan  and  Pavia,  almost 
his  only  possessions.  But  though  weak  and  unwarlike  him- 
self, he  had  the  good  fortune  to  employ  Carmagnola,  one  of 
the  greatest  generals  of  that  military  age.  Most  of  the 
revolted  cities  were  tired  of  their  new  masters,  and,  their 
inclinations  conspiring  with  Carmagnola's  eminent  talents 
and  activity,  the  house  of  Visconti  reassumed  its  former  as- 
cendency from  the  Sessia  to  the  Adige.  Its  fortunes  might 
have  been  still  more  prosperous  if  Filippo  Maria  had  not 
rashly  as  well  as  ungratefully  offended  Carmagnola.  That 
great  captain  retired  to  Venice,  and  inflamed  a  disposition 
towards  war  which  the  Florentines  and  the  duke  of  Savoy 
had  already  excited.  The  Venetians  had  previously  gained 
some  important  advantages  in  another  quarter,  by  reducing 
the  country  of  Friuli,  with  part  of  Istria,  which  had  for  many 
centuries  depended  on  the  temporal  authority  of  a  neighbor- 
ing prelate,  the  patriarch  of  Aquileia.     They  entered  into 

1  Sanuto,  Vite  <li  Duchi  di  Venezia,  in  standing  her  acquisition,  in  the  mean- 
Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  xxii.  p.  958.  Moceni-  time,  of  Brescia,  Bergamo,  Ravenna,  and 
go's  harangue  is  very  long  in  Sanuto.  I  Crema  Id.  ii.  462.  They  increased  con- 
have  endeavored  to  preserve  the  suh-  siderably  in  the  next  twenty  years.  The 
Stance.  But  the  calculations  are  so  taxes,  however,  were  light  in  the  Venetian 
strange  and  manifestly  inexact  that  they  dominions  ;  and  Daru  conceives  the  reve- 
deserve  little  regard.  Daru  has  given  nues  of  the  republic,  reduced  to  a  corn 
them  more  at  length,  Hist,  de  Venise,  price,  to  have  not  exceeded  the  valu« 
rol.  ii.  p.  205.  The  revenues  of  Venice,  of  11^000,000  francs  at  the  preseet  day 
which  had  amounted  to  996.290  ducats  in  p.  542 
1423.  were  but  945,750  in  1469,  notwith 


448  CHANGE  IN  MILITARY   SYSTEM.     Chap.  III.  Part  II 

this  new  alliance.     No  undertaking  of  the  republic  had  been 

u2fi        more  successful.     Carmagnola  led  on  their  armies, 

and  in  about  two  years  Venice  acquired  Brescia 

and  Bergamo,  and  extended  her  boundary  to  the  river  Adda, 

which  she  was  destined  never  to  pa<s. 

Such  conquests  could  only  be  made  by  a  city  so  peculiar 

ly  maritime  as  Venice  through  the  help  of  inter- 
change in  J  -r>  •  i       •  1  1 

the  military    cenary  troops.      But,   m    employing   them,    she 
system.  merely  conformed  to  a  fashion  which   states  to 

whom  it  was  less  indispensable  had  long  since  established. 
A  great  revolution  had  taken  place  in  the  system  of  military 
service  through  most  parts  of  Europe,  but  especially  in  Italy. 
During  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries,  whether  the 
Italian  cities  were  engaged  in  their  contest  with  the  em- 
perors or  in  less  arduous  and  general  hostilities  among  each 
other,  they  seem  to  have  poured  out  almost  their  whole 
population  as  an  armed  and  loosely  organized  militia.  A 
single  city,  with  its  adjacent  district,  sometimes  brought 
twenty  or  thirty  thousand  men  into  the  field.  Every  man. 
according  to  the  trade  he  practised,  or  quarter  of  the  city 
wherein  he  dwelt,  knew  his  own  banner  and  the  captain  he 
was  to  obey.1  In  battle  the  carroccio  formed  one  com- 
mon rallying-point,  the  pivot  of  every  movement.  This 
was  a  chariot,  or  rather  Avagon,  painted  with  vermilion,  and 
hearing  the  city  standard  elevated  upon  it.  That  of  Milan 
required  four  pair  of  oxen  to  drag  it  forward.2  To  defend 
this  sacred  emblem  of  his  country,  which  Muratori  compares 
to  the  ark  of  the  covenant  among  the  Jews,  was  the  constant 
object,  that,  giving  a  sort  of  concentration  and  uniformity  to 
the  army,  supplied  in  some  degree  the  want  of  more  regular 
tactics.  This  militia  was  of  course  principally  composed 
of  infantry.  At  the  famous  battle  of  the  Arbia,  in  1260, 
the  Guelf  Florentines  had  thirty  thousand  foot  and  three 
thousand  horse;3  and  the  usual  proportion  was  five,  six,  01 
ten  to  one.  Gentlemen,  however,  were  always  mounted ;  and 
the  superiority  of  a  heavy  cavalry  must  have  been  prodig- 
iously great  over  an   undisciplined  and   ill-armed  populace. 

1  Muratori,  Antiq.  Ital.  Diss.  26;  Deni-  to  Rome.  Parma  and  Cremona  lost  their 
»a,  Rivoluzioni  d'  Italia,  1.  xii.  c.  4.  carroceios  to  each  other,  and  exchanged 

2  The  carroccio  was  invented  by  Eribert,  them  some  years  afterwards  with  great 
i  celebrated  archbishop  of  Milan,  about  exultation.  In  the  fourteenth  century 
1039.  Annali  di  Murat. ;  Antiq.  Ital.  this  custom  had  gone  into  disuse.  —  TiL 
Diss.  26.     The  carroccio  of  Milan   was  ibid.     Denina,  1.  xii.  c.  4. 

taken  b*-  Frederic  II.  in  1237.  and  sent        3  Villain,  1.  \i.  c.  79 


[TAJ.T.  EMPLOYMENT   OF   FOREIGN   TROOPS.  449 

In  the  thirteenth  and  following  centuries  armies  seem  to 
have  been  considered  as  formidable  nearly  in  proportion  to 
the  number  of  men-at-arms  or  lancers.  A  charge  of  cav- 
alry was  irresistible  ;  battles  were  continually  won  by  inferior 
numbers,  and  vast  slaughter  was  made  among  the  fugitives.1 

As  the  comparative  inefficiency  of  foot-soldiers  became 
evident,  a  greater  proportion  of  cavalry  was  employed,  and 
armies,  though  better  equipped  and  disciplined,  were  less 
numerous.  This  we  find  in  the  early  part  of  the  fourteenth 
century.  The  main  point  for  a  state  at  war  was  x 
to  obtain  a  sufficient  force  of  men-at-arms.  As  few  of  foreign 
Italian  cities  could  muster  a  large  body  of  cavalry  tr0°Ps- 
from  their  own  population,  the  obvious  resource  was  to  hire 
mercenary  troops.  This  had  been  practised  in  some  instances 
much  earlier.  The  city  of  Genoa  took  the  count  of  Savoy 
into  pay  with  two  hundred  horse  in  1225.2  Florence  re- 
tained five  hundred  French  lances  in  1282.8  But  it  became 
much  more  general  in  the  fourteenth  century,  chiefly  after 
the  expedition  of  the  emperor  Henry  VII.  in  1310.  Many 
German  soldiers  of  fortune,  remaining  in  Italy  upon  this  oc- 
casion, engaged  in  the  service  of  Milan,  Florence,  or  some 
other  state.  The  subsequent  expeditions  of  Louis  of  Ba- 
varia in  1326,  and  of  John  king  of  Bohemia  in  1331, 
brought  a  fresh  accession  of  adventurers  from  the  same 
country.  Others  again  came  from  France,  and  some  from 
Hungary.  All  preferred  to  continue  in  the  richest  country 
and  finest  climate  of  Europe,  where  their  services  were 
anxiously  solicited  and  abundantly  repaid.  An  unfortunate 
prejudice  in  favor  of  strangers  prevailed  among  the  Italians 
of  that  age.  They  ceded  to  them,  one  knows  not  why,  cer- 
tainly without  having  been  vanquished,  the  palm  of  military 
skill  and  valor.  The  word  Transalpine  (Oltramontani)  is 
frequently  applied  to  hired  cavalry  by  the  two  Villani  as  an 
epithet  of  excellence. 

The  experience  of  every  fresh  campaign  now  told  more 

1  Sismondi,  t.  iii.  p.  263,  &c,  has  some    the  1500  lances  who  composed  the  origi- 
judicious  observations  on  this  subject.        nal  companies  of  ordonnance  raised  by 

2  Muratori.  Dissert.  26.  Charles  VI.  amounted  to  nine  thousaud 
a  Ammirato,   1st.  b'iorent.  p.  159.     The    cavalry.     But  in  Italy  the  number  was 

lame  was  done  in  1297,  p.  200.     A  lance,  smaller.     We  read  frequently  of  barbuti, 

In  the  technical  language  of  those  ages,  which  are  defined  lanze  de  due  cavalli. 

included  the  lighter  cavalry  attached  to  Corio,   p.   437.     Lances  of  three  hcrsea 

the  man-at-arms  as  well  as  himself.     In  were  introduced  about  the  middle  of  th» 

Prance  the  full  complement  of  a  lance  fourteenth  century. — Id.  p.  466. 
(lance  fournie)  was  five  or  six  horses ;  thus 
VOL.  I.  —  M.                     29 


450    EMPLOYMENT  OF   FOREIGN    TROOPS.    Chap.  111.  Pakt  Ij 

and  more  against  the  ordinary  militia.  It  has  been  usual  foi 
modern  writers  to  lament  the  degeneracy  of  martial  spirit 
among  the  Italians  of  that  age.  But  the  contest  was  too  un- 
equal between  an  absolutely  invulnerable  body  of  cuirassiers 
and  an  infantry  of  peasants  or  citizens.  The  bravest  men 
have  little  appetite  for  receiving  wounds  and  death  without 
the  hope  of  inflicting  any  in  return.  The  parochial  militia  of 
France  had  proved  equally  unserviceable ;  though,  as  the 
life  of  a  French  peasant  was  of  much  less  account  in  the 
ayes  of  his  government  than  that  of  an  Italian  citizen,  they 
were  still  led  forward  like  sheep  to  the  slaughter  against  the 
disciplined  forces  of  Edward  III.  The  cavalry  had  about 
this  time  laid  aside  the  hauberk,  or  coat  of  mail,  their  ancient 
distinction  from  the  unprotected  populace  ;  which,  though  in- 
capable of  being  cut  through  by  the  sabre,  afforded  no  de- 
fence against  the  pointed  sword  introduced  in  the  thirteenth 
century,1  nor  repelled  the  impulse  of  a  lance  or  the  crushing 
blow  of  a  battle-axe.  Plate-armor  was  substituted  in  its 
place ;  and  the  man-at-arms,  cased  in  entire  steel,  the  several 
pieces  firmly  riveted,  and  proof  against  every  stroke,  his 
charger  protected  on  the  face,  chest,  and  shoulders,  or,  as  it 
was  called,  barded,  with  plates  of  steel,  fought  with  a  securi- 
ty of  success  against  enemies  inferior  perhaps  only  in  these 
adventitious  sources  of  courage  to  himself.2 

Nor  was  the  new  system  of  conducting   hostilities    less 
inconvenient  to  the  citizens   than  the  tactics  of  a 
cused  from     battle.     Instead  of  rapid  and  predatory  invasions, 
service.  terminated  instantly  by  a   single  action,  and  not 

extending  more  than  a  few  days'  march  from  the  soldier's 
home,  the  more  skilful  combinations  usual  in  the  fourteenth 
century  frequently  protracted  an  indecisive  contest  for  a 
whole  summer.3  As  wealth  and  civilization  made  evident 
the  advantages  of  agriculture  and  mercantile  industry,  this 
loss  of  productive  labor  could  no  longer  be  endured.  Aczo 
Visconti,  who  died  in   1339,  dispensed  with  the  personal  ser- 

i  Muratori,  ad  arm.  1226.  This  is  represented  in  a  statue  of  Charles 

2  The  earliest  plate-armor,  engraved  in  I.  king  of  Naples,  who  died  in  1285.    Pc«- 

Montfaucon's  Monumens  de  la  Monarchic  sibly    the  statue  may   not   be   quite   so 

Francaise,  t.  ii.,  is  of  the  reign  of  Philip  ancient.     Montfaucon,  passim.  —  Daniel, 

the  Long,  about   1315;  but  it  does  not  Hist,  de  la  Milice  Francaise,  p.  395. 

appear  generally  till  that  of  Philip  of  Va-  3  This  tedious  warfare  d  la  Fabius  U 

lois.  or  even  later.     Before  the  complete  called  by  Villani   guerra  guereggiata,  1 

harness  of  steel  was  adopted,  plated  caps  viii.  c.  49  ;  at  least  I  can  annex  no  othei 

were  sometimes  worn  on  the  knees  aud  meaning  to  the  expTession 
elbows    and  even  greaves  on   the  legs. 


Italy.  CITIZENS  EXCUSED  FROM  SERVICE.  ±51 

vice  of  his  Milanese  subjects.  "Another  of  his  laws,"  says 
Galvaneo  Fiamma,  "  was,  that  the  people  should  not  go  to 
war,  but  remain  at  home  for  their  own  business.  For  they 
had  hitherto  been  kept  with  much  danger  and  expense  every 
year,  and  especially  in  time  of  harvest  and  vintage,  when 
princes  are  wont  to  go  to  war,  in  besieging  cities,  and  incur- 
red numberless  losses,  and  chiefly  on  account  of  the  long 
time  that  they  were  so  detained.1  This  law  of  Azzo  Vis- 
conti,  taken  separately,  might  be  ascribed  to  the  usual  policy 
of  an  absolute  government.  But  we  find  a  similar  innovation 
not  long  afterwards  at  Florence.  In  the  war  carried  on  by 
that  republic  against  Giovanni  Visconti  in  1351,  the  younger 
Villain  informs  us  that  "  the  useless  and  mischievous  personal 
service  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  district  was  commuted  into  a 
money  payment."  2  This  change  indeed  was  necessarily  ac- 
companied by  a  vast  increase  of  taxation.  The  Italian  states, 
republics  as  well  as  principalities,  levied  very  heavy  contri- 
butions. Mastino  della  Scala  had  a  revenue  of  700,000 
florins,  more,  says  John  Villani,  than  the  king  of  any  Euro- 
pean country,  except  France,  possesses.3  Yet  this  arose 
from  only  nine  cities  of  Lombardy.  Considered  with  refer- 
ence to  economy,  almost  any  taxes  must  be  a  cheap  commuta- 
tion for  personal  service.  But  economy  may  be  regarded 
too  exclusively,  and  can  never  counterbalance  that  degrada- 
tion of  a  national  character  which  proceeds  from  intrusting 
the  public  defence  to  foreigners. 

It  could  hardly  be  expected  that  stipendiary  troops,  chiefly 
composed  of  Germans,  would  conduct  themselves  companies 
without  insolence  and  contempt  of  the  effeminacy  of  adven- 
which  courted  their  services.     Indifferent  to  the  turer8, 
cause  they  supported,  the  highest  pay  and  the  richest  plun 
der  were  their  constant  motives.    As  Italy  was  generally  the 
theatre  of  war  in  some  of  her  numerous  states,  a  soldier  of 
fortune,  with  his  lance  and  charger  for  an  inheritance,  passed 
from  one  service  to  another  without  regret  and  without  dis- 
credit.    But  if   peace   happened  to  be  pretty  universal,  he 
might  be  thrown  out  of  his  only  occupation,  and  reduced  to 
a  very  inferior  condition,  in  a  country  of  which  he   was  not 

i  Muratori,  Antiquit.  Ital.  Dissert.  26.  ture  to  augment  the  taxes  imposed  while 

2  Matt.  Villani,  p.  135.  they  had  been  free.    Complaints  of  heavy 

3  L.  xi.  c  45.  I  cannot  imagine  why  taxation  are  certainly  often  made  against 
Sismondi  asserts,  t.  iv.  p.  432,  that  the  the  Visconti  and  other  tyrants  in  the 
lords  of  cities  in  Lombardy  did  not  ven-  fourteenth  century. 


452  COMPANIES   OF  ADVENTURERS.     Chap.  III.  Part  II 

a  native.  It  naturally  occurred  to  men  of  their  feelings 
that,  if  money  and  honor  could  only  be  had  while  they  re- 
tained their  arm-,  it  was  their  own  fault  if  they  ever 
relinquished  them.  Upon  this  principle  they  first  acted  in 
1343,  when  the  republic  of  Pisa  disbanded  a  large  body  of 
German  cavalry  which  had  been  employed  in  a  war  with 
Florence.1  A  partisan,  whom  the  Italians  call  the  duke 
Guarnieri,  engaged  these  dissatisfied  mercenaries  to  remain 
united  under  his  command.  His  plan  was  to  levy  contribu- 
tions on  all  countries  which  he  entered  with  his  company, 
without  aiming  at  any  conquests.  No  Italian  army,  he  well 
knew,  could  be  raised  to  oppose  him ;  and  he  trusted  that 
other  mercenaries  would  not  be  ready  to  fight  against  men 
who  had  devised  a  scheme  so  advantageous  to  the  profession. 
This  was  the  first  of  the  companies  of  adventure  which  con- 
tinued for  many  years  to  be  the  scourge  and  disgrace  of 
Italy.  Guarnieri,  after  some  time,  withdrew  his  troops,  sati- 
ated with  plunder,  into  Germany  ;  but  he  served  in  the  inva- 
sion of  Naples  by  Louis  king  of  Hungary  in  1348,  and, 
forming  a  new  company,  ravaged  the  ecclesiastical  state.  A 
still  more  formidable  band  of  disciplined  robbers  appeared 
in  1353,  under  the  command  of  Fra  Moriale,  and  after- 
wards of  Conrad  Lando.  This  was  denominated  the  Great 
Company,  and  consisted  of  several  thousand  regular  troops, 
besides  a  multitude  of  half-armed  ruffians,  who  assisted  as 
spies,  pioneers,  and  plunderers.  The  rich  cities  of  Tuscany 
and  Romagna  paid  large  sums,  that  the  great  company,  which 
was  perpetually  in  motion,  might  not  march  through  their 
territory.  Florence  alone  magnanimously  resolved  not  to 
offer  this  ignominious  tribute.  Upon  two  occasions,  once  in 
1358,  and  still  more  conspicuously  the  next  year,  she  refused 
either  to  give  a  passage  to  the  company,  or  to  redeem  herself 
by  money  ;  and  in  each  instance  the  German  robbers  were 
compelled  to  retire.  At  this  time  they  consisted  of  five 
thousand  cuirassiers,  and  their  whole  body  was  not  less  than 
twenty  thousand  men  ;  a  terrible  proof  of  the  evils  which 
an  erroneous   system  had  entailed  upon  Italy.     Nor   were 

1  Sismondi,  t.v.  p.  380.    The  dangerous  some  desperate  battles   the  mercenaries 

aspect  which  these  German  mercenaries  were  defeated  and  Lodrisio  taken,     t.  t. 

might  assume  had  appeared  four  years  p.  278.     In  this  instance,  however,  they 

before,  when  Lodrisio.  one  of  the  Visconti,  acted  for  another  ;  Guarnieri  was  the  firs? 

aaving  quarrelled  with  the  lord  of  Milan,  who  taught  them  to  preserve  the  impar 

led  a  large  body  of  trocps  who  had  just  tiality  of  general  robbers, 
been  disbanued  again?    the  city.     After 


Italy.  SIR  JOHN  HAWKWOOD.  453 

they  repulsed  t:  i  this  occasion  by  the  actual  exertion-  of 
Florence.  Th  courage  of  that  republic  was  in  her  councils, 
not  in  her  arms ;  the  resistance  made  to  Lando's  demand  was 
a  burst  of  national  feeling,  and  rather  against  the  advice  of 
the  leading  Florentines ; *  but  the  army  employed  was  en- 
tirely composed  of  mercenary  troops,  and  probably  for  the 
greater  part  of  foreigners.  • 

None  of  the  foreign  partizans  who  entered  into  the  service 
of  Italian  states  acquired  such  renown  in  that  ca-  sir  John 
reer  as  an  Englishman  whom  contemporary  writers  Hawkwood- 
call  Aucud  or  Agutus,  but  to  whom  we  may  restore  his  na- 
tional appellation  of  Sir  John  Hawkwood.  This  very  eminent 
man  had  served  in  the  war  of  Edward  TIL,  and  obtained  his 
knighthood  from  that  sovereign,  though  originally,  if  we  may 
trust  common  fame,  bred  to  the  trade  of  a  tailor.  After  the 
peace  of  Bretigni,  France  was  ravaged  by  the  disbanded 
troops,  whose  devastations  Edward  was  accused,  perhaps  un- 
justly, of  secretly  instigating.  A  large  body  of  these,  under 
the  name  of  the  White  Company,  passed  into  the  service  of 
the  Marquis  of  Montferrat.  They  were  some  time  afterwards 
employed  by  the  Pisans  against  Florence  ;  and  during  this 
latter  war  Hawkwood  appears  as  their  commander.  For 
thirty  years  he  was  continually  engaged  in  the  service  of  the 
Visconti,  of  the  pope,  or  of  the  Florentines,  to  whom  he  de- 
voted himself  for  the  latter  part  of  his  life  with  more  fidelity 
and  steadiness  than  he  had  shown  in  his  first  campaigns. 
The  republic  testified  her  gratitude  by  a  public  funeral,  and 
by  a  monument  in  the  Duomo,  which  still  perpetuates  his 
memory. 

The  name  of  Sir  John  Hawkwood  is  worthy  to  be  remem 
bered  as  that  of  the  first  distinguished  commander  Want  of 
who  had  appeared  in  Europe  since  the  destruction  military 
of  the  Roman  empire.     It  would  be  absurd  to  sup-  before  his 
pose  that  any  of  the  constituent  elements  of  mil-  time• 
itary  genius  which  nature  furnishes  to  energetic  characters 
were  wanting  to  the  leaders  of  a  barbarian  or  feudal  army : 
untroubled  perspicacity  in  confusion,  firm  decision,  rapid  exe- 
cution, providence  against  attack,  fertility   of  resource  and 
stratagem  —  these  are  in  quality  as  much  required  from  the 
chief  of  an  Indian  tribe  as  from  the  accomplished  commander 

i  Matt.  Villani,  p.  537. 


454  WANT  OF  MILITARY  SCIENCE.      Chap.  in.  Part  Tl 

But  we  do  not  find  them  in  any  instance  so  consummated  by 
habitual  skill  as  to  challenge  the  name  of  generalship.  No 
one  at  least  occurs  to  me,  previously  to  the  middle  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  to  whom  history  has  unequivocally  as- 
signed that  character.  It  is  very  rarely  that  we  find  even 
the  order  of  battle  specially  noticed.  The  monks,  indeed,  our 
only  chroniclers,  were  poor  judges  of  martial  excellence  ;  yet, 
as  war  is  the  main  topic  of  all  annals,  we  could  hardly  re- 
main ignorant  of  any  distinguished  skill  in  its  operations. 
This  neglect  of  military  science  certainly  did  not  proceed  from 
any  predilection  for  the  arts  of  peace.  It  arose  out  of  the  gen- 
eral manners  of  society,  and  out  of  the  nature  and  composition 
of  armies  in  the  middle  ages.  The  insubordinate  spirit  of  feu- 
dal tenants,  and  the  emulous  equality  of  chivalry,  were  alike 
hostile  to  that  gradation  of  rank,  that  punctual  observance  of 
irksome  duties,  that  prompt  obedience  to  a  supreme  command, 
through  which  a  single  soul  is  infused  into  the  active  mass, 
and  the  rays  of  individual  merit  converge  to  the  head  of  the 
general. 

In  the  fourteenth  century  we  begin  to  perceive  something 
of  a  more  scientific  character  in  military  proceedings,  and 
historians  for  the  first  time  discover  that  success  does  not  en- 
tirely depend  upon  intrepidity  and  physical  prowess.  The 
victory  of  Muhldorf  over  the  Austrian  princes  in  1322,  that 
decided  a  civil  war  in  the  empire,  is  ascribed  to  the  ability  of 
the  Bavarian  commander.1  Many  distinguished  officers  were 
formed  in  the  school  of  Edward  III.  Yet  their  excellences 
were  perhaps  rather  those  of  active  partisans  than  of  expe 
rienced  generals.  Their  successes  are  still  due  rather  to 
daring  enthusiasm  than  to  wary  and  calculating  combination. 
Like  inexpert  chess-players,  they  surprise  us  by  happy  sallies 
against  rule,  or  display  their  talents  in  rescuing  themselves 
from  the  consequence  of  their  own  mistakes.  Thus  the  ad- 
mirable arrangements  of  the  Black  Prince  at  Poitiers  hardly 
redeem  the  temerity  which  placed  him  in  a  situation  where 
the  egregious  folly  of  his  adversary  alone  could  have  per- 
mitted him  to  triumph.  Hawkwood  therefore  appears  to  me 
the  first  real  general  of  modern  times;  the  earliest  master, 
however  imperfect,  in  the  science  of  Turenne  and  Welling- 
ton.     Every    contemporary   Italian    historian    speaks    with 

1  Struvius,   Corpus  Hist.   German,  p.    ral,  is  called  by  a  contemporary  writei 
685      Schweppermau,  the  Bavarian  gene-    clarus  militari  scientia  vir. 


Italt  SCHOOL   OF   ITALIAN  GENERALS.  455 

admiration  of  his  skilful  tactics  in  battle,  his  stratagem-,  his 
well-conducted  retreats.  Praise  of  this  description,  as  I  have 
observed,  is  hardly  bestowed,  certainly  not  so  continually,  on 
any  former  captain. 

Hawkwood  was  not  only  the  greatest  but  the  last  of  the 
foreign  condottieri,  or  captains  of  mercenary  bands.  School  of 
While  he  was  yet  living,  a  new  military  school  Italian 
had  been  formed  in  Italy,  which  not  only  super-  genera 
seded,  but  eclipsed,  all  the  strangers.  This  important  reform 
was  ascribed  to  Alberic  di  Barbiano,  lord  of  some  petty  ter- 
ritories near  Bologna.  He  formed  a  company  altogether  of 
Italians  about  the  year  1379.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
natives  of  Italy  had  before  been  absolutely  excluded  from 
service.  We  find  several  Italians,  such  as  the  Malatesta 
family,  lords  of  Rimini,  and  the  Rossi  of  Parma,  command- 
ing the  armies  of  Florence  much  earlier.  But  this  was  the 
first  trading  company,  if  I  may  borrow  the  analogy,  the  first 
regular  body  of  Italian  mercenaries,  attached  only  to  their 
commander  without  any  consideration  of  party,  like  the  Ger- 
mans and  English  of  Lando  and  Hawkwood.  Alberic  di 
Barbiano,  though  himself  no  doubt  a  man  of  military  talents, 
is  principally  distinguished  by  the  school  of  great  generals 
which  the  company  of  St.  George  under  his  command  pro- 
duced, and  which  may  be  deduced,  by  regular  succession,  to 
the  sixteenth  century.  The  first  in  order  of  time,  and  imme- 
diate contemporaries  of  Barbiano,  were  Jacopo  del  Verme, 
Facino  Cane,  and  Octobon  Terzo.  Among  an  intelligent  and 
educated  people,  little  inclined  to  servile  imitation,  the  mili- 
tary art  made  great  progress.  The  most  eminent  condottieri 
being  divided,  in  general,  between  belligerents,  each  of  them 
had  his  genius  excited  and  kept  in  tension  by  that  of  a  rival 
in  glory.  Every  resource  of  science  as  well  as  experience, 
every  improvement  in  tactical  arrangements,  and  the  use  of 
arms,  were  required  to  obtain  an  advantage  over  such  equal 
enemies.  In  the  first  year  of  the  fifteenth  century  the 
Italians  brought  their  newly  acquired  superiority  to  a  test. 
The  emperor  Robert,  in  alliance  with  Florence,  invaded  Gian 
Galeazzo's  dominions  with  a  considerable  army.  From  old 
reputation,  which  so  frequently  survives  the  intrinsic  qualities 
upon  which  it  was  founded,  an  impression  appears  to  have 
been  excited  in  Italy  that  the  native  troops  were  still  unequal 
to  meet  the  charge  of  German  cuirassiers.     The   duke  of 


456  DEFENSIVE  ARMS.         Chap.  III.  Part   II. 

Milan  gave  orders  to  his  general,  Jacopo  del  Verme,  to  avoid 
a  combat.  Bui  that  able  leader  was  aware  of  a  great  relative 
change  in  the  two  armies.  The  Germans  had  neglected  to 
improve  their  discipline  ;  their  arms  were  less  easily  wielded, 
their  horses  less  obedient  to  the  bit.  A  single  skirmish  was 
enough  to  open  their  eyes  ;  they  found  themselves  decidedly 
inferior ;  and  having  engaged  in  the  war  with  the  expectation 
of  easy  success,  were  readily  disheartened.1  This  victory, 
or  rather  this  decisive  proof  that  victory  might  be  achieved, 
set  Italy  at  rest  for  almost  a  century  from  any  apprehensions 
on  the  side  of  her  ancient  masters. 

Whatever  evils  might  be  derived,  and  they  were  not  trifling, 
from  the  employment  of  foreign  or  native  mercenaries,  it  was 
impossible  to  discontinue  the  system  without  general  consent ; 
and  too  many  states  found  their  own  advantage  in  it  for  such 
an  agreement.  The  condottieri  were  indeed  all  notorious  for 
contempt  of  engagements.  Their  rapacity  was  equal  to  their 
bad  faith.  Besides  an  enormous  pay,  for  every  private  cui- 
rassier received  much  more  in  value  than  a  subaltern  officer 
at  present,  they  exacted  gratifications  for  every  success.2  But 
everything  was  endured  by  ambitious  governments  who  wanted 
their  aid.  Florence  and  Venice  were  the  two  states  which 
owed  most  to  the  companies  of  adventure.  The  one  loved 
war  without  its  perils ;  the  other  could  never  have  obtained 
an  inch  of  territory  with  a  population  of  sailors.  But  they 
were  both  almost  inexhaustibly  rich  by  commercial  industry ; 
and,  as  the  surest  paymasters,  were  best  served  by  those  they 
employed.  The  Visconti  might  perhaps  have  extended  their 
conquest  over  Lombardy  with  the  militia  of  Milan  ;  but  with- 
out a  Jacopo  del  Verme  or  a  Carmagnola,  the  banner  of 
St.  Mark  would  never  have  floated  at  Verona  and  Ber- 
gamo. 

The  Italian  armies  of  the  fifteenth  century  have  been  re- 
~ ,    .  marked  for  one   striking   peculiarity.      War   has 

Defensive  -i  ,•     i  i    i  ^ 

arms  of  never  been  conducted  at  so  little  personal  hazard 
that  age.        tQ  ^  so^jer#     Combats  frequently  occur,  in  the 

i  Sismondi,  t.  vii.  p.  439.  Matt.  Villani,  p.  62;   Sismondi,  t.  v    p 

2  Paga  doppia,  e  mese  compiuto,  of  412. 
which  we  frequently  read,  sometimes  Gian  Galeazzo  Visconti  promised  con- 
granted  improvidently,  and  more  often  stant  half-pay  to  the  condottieri  whom 
demanded  unreasonably.  The  first  speaks  he  disbanded  in  1396.  This,  perhaps,  u 
for  itself;  the  second  was  the  reckoning  the  first  instance  of  half-pay.  —  SismoudJ 
a  month's  service  as  completed  when  it  t.  vii.  p.  379. 
was  begun,  in  calculating  their  pay. — 


Italy.  DEFENSIVE  ARMS.  457 

annals  of  that  age,  wherein  success,  though  warmly  contested, 
costs  very  few  lives  even  to  the  vanquished.1  This  innocence 
of  blood,  which  some  historians  turn  into  ridicule,  was  no 
doubt  owing  in  a  great  degree  to  the  rapacity  of  the  compa- 
nies of  adventure,  who,  in  expectation  of  enriching  them- 
selves by  the  ransom  of  prisoners,  were  anxious  to  save 
their  lives.  Much  of  the  humanity  of  modern  warfare  was 
originally  due  to  this  motive.  But  it  was  rendered  more 
practicable  by  the  nature  of  their  arms.  For  once,  and  for 
once  only  in  the  history  of  mankind,  the  art  of  defence  had 
outstripped  that  of  destruction.  In  a  charge  of  lancers  many 
fell,  unhorsed  by  the  shock,  and  might  be  suffocated  or  bruised 
to  death  by  the  pressure  of  their  own  armor ;  but  the  lance's 
point  could  not  penetrate  the  breastplate,  the  sword  fell 
harmless  upon  the  helmet,  the  conqueror,  in  the  first  impulse 
of  passion,  could  not  assail  any  vital  part  of  a  prostrate  but 
not  exposed  enemy.  Still  less  was  to  be  dreaded  from  the 
archers  or  cross-bowmen,  who  composed  a  large  part  of  the 
infantry.  The  bow  indeed,  as  drawn  by  an  English  foot- 
soldier,  was  the  most  formidable  of  arms  before  the  invention 
of  gunpowder.  That  ancient  weapon,  though  not  perhaps 
common  among  the  Northern  nations,  nor  for  several  centu- 
ries after  their  settlement,  was  occasionally  in  use  before  the 
crusades.  William  employed  archers  in  the  battle  of  Hast- 
ings.2 Intercourse  with  the  East,  its  natural  soil,  during  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  ages,  rendered  the  bow  better  known. 
But  the  Europeans  improved  on  the  eastern  method  of  con- 

1  Instances  of  this  are  very  frequent,  but  it  is  not  recorded  that  any  one  was 

Thus  at  the  action  of  Zagonara,  in  1423,  wounded.    Roscoe's  Lorenzo  de'  Medici, 

but  three  persons,  according  to  Machia-  vol.  ii.  p.  37.     Guicciardini*s  general  tes- 

vel,  lost  their  lives,  and  these  by  suffoca-  timony  to  the  character  of  these  combats 

tion  in  the  mud.     1st.  Fiorent.  1.  iy.     At  is  unequivocal      He  speaks  of  the  battle 

that  of  Molinella,  in  1467,  he  says  that  of  Fornova,  between  the  confederates  of 

no  one  was  killed.     1.  vii.     Ammirato  re-  Lombardy  and  the  army  of  Charles  VIII. 

proves  him  for  this,  as  all  the  authors  of  returning  from  Naples  in  1495,  as  very 

the  time  represent  it  to  have  been  sangui-  remarkable  on  account  of  the  slaughter, 

nary  (t.  ii.  p.  102),  and  insinuates  that  which  amounted  on  the  Italian  side  to 

Machiavel  ridicules  the  inoffensive ness  of  3.000  men  :  perche  fii  la  prima,  che  da 

those   armies   more   than    they   deserve,  lunghissimo  tempo  in  qua  si  combattesse 

schernendo,   come   egli   suol   far,   quella  con   uccisione   e  con   sangue    in    Italia, 

milizia.     Certainly   some   few  battles   of  perche  innanzi  a  questa  morivano  pochis- 

thc  fifteenth  century  were  not  only  ob-  simi  uomini  in  un  fatto  d'arme.     1.  ii.  p. 

stinately   contested,   but  attended   with  175. 

considerable  loss.     Sismondi,  t.  x.  p.  126,  2  Pedites  in  fronte  locavit,  sagittis  ar- 

137.    But,  in  general,  the  slaughter  must  matos  et  balistis,  item  pedites  in  ordina 

appear  very  trifling.     Ammirato  himself  secundo  firmiores  et  loricatos,  ultimo  tur 

Bays  that  in  an  action  between  the  Nea-  mas  equitum.    Gul.  Pictaviensis  (in  Du 

politau  and  papal  troops  in  1486,  which  Chesne),  p.  201.     Several  archers  are  rep- 

lasted  all  day,  not  only  no  one  was  killed,  resented  in  the  tapestry  of  Bajeux 


458  DEFENSIVE  ARMS.         Chap.  HI.  Part  II 

fining  its  use  to  cavalry.  By  employing  infantry  as  archers, 
they  gained  increased  size,  more  steady  position,  and  surer 
aim  for  the  bow.  Much,  however,  depended  on  the  strength 
and  skill  of  the  archer.  It  was  a  peculiarly  English  weapon, 
and  none  of  the  other  principal  nations  adopted  it  so  gener- 
ally or  so  successfully.  The  cross-bow,  which  brought  the 
strong  and  weak  to  a  level,  was  more  in  favor  upon  the  con- 
tinent. This  instrument  is  said  by  some  writers  to  have  been 
introduced  after  the  first  crusade  in  the  reign  of  Louis  the 
Fat.1  But,  if  we  may  trust  William  of  Poitou,  it  was  em- 
ployed, as  well  as  the  long-bow,  at  the  battle  of  Hastings. 
Several  of  the  popes  prohibited  it  as  a  treacherous  weapon  : 
and  the  restriction  was  so  far  regarded,  that,  in  the  time  of 
Philip  Augustus,  its  use  is  said  to  have  been  unknown  in 
France.2  By  degrees  it  became  more  general;  and  cross- 
bowmen  were  considered  as  a  very  necessary  part  of  a  well- 
organized  army.  But  both  the  arrow  and  the  quarrel  glanced 
away  from  plate-armor,  such  as  it  became  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  impervious  in  every  point,  except  when  the  vizor 
was  raised  from  the  face,  or  some  part  of  the  body  acciden- 
tally exposed.  The  horse  indeed  was  less  completely  pro- 
tected. 

Many  disadvantages  attended  the  security  against  wounds 
for  which  this  armor  had  been  devised.  The  enormous 
weight  exhausted  the  force  and  crippled  the  limbs.  It  ren- 
dered the  heat  of  a  southern  climate  insupportable.  In  some 
circumstances  it  increased  the  danger  of  death,  as  in  the 
passage  of  a  river  or  morass.  It  was  impossible  to  compel 
an  enemy  to  fight,  because  the  least  entrenchment  or  natural 
obstacle  could  stop  such  unwieldy  assailants.  The  troops 
might  be  kept  in  constant  alarm  at  night,  and  either  com- 
pelled to  sleep  under  arms,  or  run  the  risk  of  being  surprised 
before  they  could  rivet  their  plates  of  steel.8  Neither  the 
Italians,  however,  nor  the  Transalpines,  would  surrender  a 
mode  of  defence  which  they  ought  to  have  deemed  inglorious. 
But  in  order  to  obviate  some  of  its  military  inconvenience.-^, 
as  well  as  to  give  a  concentration  in  attack,  which  lancers 
impetuously  charging  in  a  single  line,  according  to  the  prac- 
tice at  least  of  France  in  the  middle  ages,  did  not  preserve, 

i  Le  Grand,  Vie  privee  des  Francais,  t.  i.  p.  349. 

2  Du  Cange,  v.  Balista;  Muratori  Diss.  26,  t.  i.  p.  462  (Ital.) 

3  Sismondi,  t.  ix.  p.  158. 


Itam.  INVENTION  OF  GUNPOWDER.  459 

it  became  usual  for  the  cavalry  to  dismount,  and,  Cu8tom  of 
leaving  their  horses  at  some  distance,  to  combat  cavalry  dis- 
on  foot  with  the  lance.     This  practice,  which  must  moun  mg' 
have  been  singularly  embarrassing  with  the  plate-armor  ol 
the  fifteenth  century,  was  introduced  before  it  became  so  pon« 
derous.     It  is  mentioned  by  historians  of  the  twelfth  century, 
both  as  a  German  and  an  English  custom.1     We  find  it  in 
the  wars  of  Edward  III.     Hawkwood,  the  disciple  of  that 
school,  introduced  it  into  Italy.*2    And  it  was  practised  by  the 
English  in  their  second  wars  with  France,  especially  at  the 
battles  of  Crevant  and  Verneuil.3 

Meanwhile  a  discovery  accidentally  made,  perhaps  in  some 
remote  age  and  distant  region,  and  whose  impor-  invention  of 
tance  was  but  slowly  perceived  by  Europe,  had  gunP°wder- 
prepared  the  way  not  only  for  a  change  in  her  military  system, 
but  for  political  effects  still  more  extensive.  If  we  consider 
gunpowder  as  an  instrument  of  human  destruction,  incalcula- 
bly more  powerful  than  any  that  skill  had  devised  or  accident 
presented  before,  acquiring,  as  experience  shows  us,  a  more 
sanguinary  dominion  in  every  succeeding  age,  and  borrowing 
all  the  progressive  resources  of  science  and  civilizatian  foi 
the  extermination  of  mankind,  we  shall  be  appalled  at  the  fu 
ture  prospects  of  the  species,  and  feel  perhaps  in  no  other 
instance  so  much  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  mysterious  dis- 
pensation with  the  benevolent  order  of  Providence.  As  the 
great  security  for  established  governments,  the  surest  preser- 
vation against  popular  tumult,  it  assumes  a  more  equivocal 
character,  depending  upon  the  solution  of  a  doubtful  problem, 
whether  the  sum  of  general  happiness  has  lost  more  in  the 
last  three  centuries  through  arbitrary  power,  than  it  has 
gained  through  regular  police  and  suppression  of  disorder. 

There  seems  little  reason  to  doubt  that  gunpowder  was  in- 
troduced through  the  means  of  the  Saracens  into  Europe. 
Its  use  in  engines  of  war,  though  they  may  seem  to  have 
been  rather  like  our  fireworks  than  artillery,  is  mentioned  by 

i  The  emperor  Conrad's  cavalry  in  the  Standard,    in    1138.      Twysden,    Decern 

second  crusade  are  said  by  William   of  Script,  p.  342. 

Tyre  to  have  dismounted  on  one  occasion,  2  Sismondi,  t.  vi.  p.  429 ;  Azarius,  in 
and  fought  on  foot,  deequis  desceudentes,  Script.  Rer  Ital.  t.  xvi. ;  Matt.  Villani. 
Ht  facti  pedites;  sicut  mos  est  Teutonicis  3  Monstrelet,  t.  ii.  fol.  7,  14,  76;  Villa- 
in summis  necessitate!) us  bellica  tractare  ret,  t.  wii.  p.  89.  It  was  a  Burgundian 
negotia.  1.  xvii.  c.  4.  And  the  same  as  well  as  English  fashion.  Entre  le* 
was  done  by  the  English  in  their  engage-  Bourguignons,  says  Comines,  lors  es- 
inent  with  the  Scotch  near  North-Aller-  toi<mt  les  plus  honorez  ceux  que  de» 
jon.  commonly  called  the  battle  of  the  cendoient  avec  les  archers.     1.  i.  c.  3. 


460  INVENTION  OF  GUNPOWDER.      Cmap.  III.  Part  U 

an  Arabic  writer  in  the  Escurial  collection  about  the  year 
1249.1  It  was  known  not  long  afterwards  to  our  philosopher 
Roger  Bacon,  though  he  concealed,  in  some  degree,  the  secret 
of  its  composition.  In  the  first  part  of  the  fourteenth  century 
cannon,  or  rather  mortal's,  were  invented,  and  the  applicabil- 
ity of  gunpowder  to  purposes  of  war  was  understood.  Ed- 
ward III.  employed  some  pieces  of  artillery  with  considerable 
effect  at  Crecy.2  But  its  use  was  still  not  very  frequent;  — 
a  circumstance  which  will  surprise  us  less  when  we  consider 
the  unscientific  construction  of  artillery  ;  the  slowness  with 
which  it  could  be  loaded ;  its  stone  balls,  of  uncertain  aim 
and  imperfect  force,  being  commonly  fired  at  a  considerable 
elevation ;  and  especially  the  difficulty  of  removing  it  from 
place  to  place  during  an  action.  In  sieges,  and  in  naval  en- 
gagements, as,  for  example,  in  the  war  of  Chioggia,  it  was 
more  frequently  employed.8  Gradually,  however,  the  new 
artifice  of  evil  gained  ground.  The  French  made  the  princi- 
pal improvements.  They  cast  their  cannon  smaller,  placed 
them  on  lighter  carriages,  and  used  balls  of  iron.4  They  in- 
vented portable  arms  for  a  single  soldier,  which,  though  clumsy 
in  comparison  with  their  present  state,  gave  an  augury  of  a 
prodigious  revolution  in  the  military  art.    John  Duke  of  Bur- 

i  Casiri,  Bibl.  Arab.  Hispan.  t.  ii.  p.  7,  456,  where  he  speaks  of  the  art,  nuper 

thus  renders  the  original  description  of  rara,  nunc  communis, 

certain  missiles  used  by  the  Moors.     Ser-  2  q.  Villani,  1.  xii.  c.  67.     Gibbon  ha* 

punt,  susurrantque  scorpiones  circumli-  thrown  out  a  sort  of  objection  to  the  ccr- 

gati  ac    pulvere  nitrato    incensi,   unde  tainty  of  this  fact,  on  account  of  Frois- 

explosi  fulgurant  ac    incendunt.      Jam  sart's  silence.  But  the  positive  testimony 

videre  erat  manganum  excussum  veluti  of  Villani,   who  died  within   two   yens 

nubem  per  aera  extendi  ac  tonitrus  instar  afterwards,  and  had  manifestly  obtained 

horrendum    edere    fragorem.    ignemque  much  information  as  to  the  great  events 

undequique  vomens,  omnia   dirumpere,  passing  in   France,  cannot  be   rejected, 

incendere,  in  cineres  redigere.     The  Ara-  He  ascribes  a  material  effect  to  the  cannon 

bic  passage  is  at  the  bottom  of  the  page  ;  of  Edward,  colpi  delle  bombarde,  which  I 

and  one  would  be  glad  to  know  whether  suspect,  from  his  strong  expressions,  had 

pulvis  nitratus  is  a  fair  translation.     But  not  been  employed  before,  except  against 

I   think  there  can  on  the  whole  be  no  stonewalls.    It  seemed,  he  says,  as  if  God 

doubt   that  gunpowder  is  meant.     An-  thundered  con  grande  uccisione  di  genti, 

other  Arabian  writer  seems  to  describe  e  sfondamento  di  cavalli. 

the  use  of  cannon  in  the  years  1312  and  8  Gattaro,  1st.  Padovana,  in  Script.  Her. 

1323.     Id.  ibid.     And  the  chronicle  of  Ital.  t.  xvii.  p.  360.     Several  proofs  of  the 

Alphonso  XI.,  king  of  Castile,  distinctly  employment  of  artillery  in  French  sieges 

mentions  them  at  the  siege  of  Algeciras  during  the  reign  of  Charles  V.  occur  in 

in  1342.     But  before  this  they  were  suf-  Villaret.     See  the  word  Artillerie  in  the 

Seiently  known  in  France.     Gunpowder  index. 

and  cannon  are  both  mentioned  in  regis-  Gian  Galeazzo  had,  according  to  Corio. 
ters  of  accounts  under  1338  (Du  Cange,  v.  thirty-four  pieces  of  cannon,  small  and 
Bombarda).  and  in  another  document  of  great,  in  the  Milanese  army,  about  1397. 
1345.  Hist,  du  Languedoc.  t.  iv.  p.  204.  4  Guicciardiiu,  1.  i.  p.  75,  has  a  remark- 
But  the  strongest  evidence  is  a  passage-  of  able  passage  on  the  superiority  of  the 
Petrarch,  written  before  1344,  and  quoted  French  over  the  Italian  artillery  in  con 
"n  Muratori,  A.ntich.  Ital.  Dissert.  26.  p.  sequence  of  these  improvements. 


Italy.  SFORZA  AND   BRACCIO.  46 i 

gundy,  in  1411,  had  4000  hand-cannops,  as  they  were  called; 
in  his  army.1  They  are  found,  under  different  names  and  mod- 
ifications of  form  —  for  which  I  refer  the  reader  to  professed 
writers  on  tactics  —  in  most  of  the  wars  that  historians  of  the 
fifteenth  century  record,  but  less  in  Italy  than  beyond  the  Alps. 
The  Milanese,  in  1449,  are  said  to  have  armed  their  militia 
with  20.000  muskets,  which  struck  terror  into  the  old  generals.2 
But  these  muskets,  supported  on  a  rest,  and  charged  with  great 
delay,  did  less  execution  than  our  sanguinary  science  would 
require  ;  and,  uncombined  with  the  admirable  invention  of  the 
bayonet,  could  not  in  any  degree  resist  a  charge  of  cavalry 
The  pike  had  a  greater  tendency  to  subvert  the  military  sys- 
tem of  the  middle  ages,  and  to  demonstrate  the  efficiency  of  dis- 
ciplined infantry.  Two  free  nations  had  already  discomfited, 
by  the  help  of  such  infantry,  those  arrogant  knights  on  whom 
the  fate  of  battles  had  depended  —  the  Bohemians,  instructed 
in  the  art  of  war  by  their  great  master,  John  Zisca  ;  and  the 
Swiss,  who,  after  winning  their  independence  inch  by  inch 
from  the  house  of  Austria,  had  lately  established  their 
renown  by  a  splendid  victory  over  Charles  of  Burgundy. 
Louis  XI.  took  a  body  of  mercenaries  from  the  United  Can- 
tons into  pay.  Maximilian  had  recourse  to  the  same  assist 
ance.8  And  though  the  importance  of  infantry  was  not 
perhaps  decidedly  established  till  the  Milanese  wars  of  Louis 
XII.  and  Francis  L,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  yet  the  last 
years  of  the  middle  ages,  according  to  our  division,  indicated 
the  commencement  of  that  military  revolution  in  the  general 
employment  of  pikemen  and  musketeers. 

Soon  after  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century,  to  returr 
from  this  digression,  two  illustrious  captains,  edu-  Rivalry  of 
cated   under   Alberic   di    Barbiano,  turned   upon  Sforzaand 
themselves  the  eyes  of  Italy.     These  were  Braccio 
di  Montone,  a  noble   Perugian,  and   Sforza  Attendolo,  origi- 
nally a  peasant  in  the  village  of  Cotignuola.     Nearly  equal 
in  reputation,  unless  perhaps  Braccio  may  be  reckoned   the 
more    consummate   general,  they   were   divided   by  a  long 

i  Villaret,  t.  xiii  p.  176,  310.  3  See  Guicciardini's  character  of  the 

2  Sismondi,  t.  ix.  p.  341.     He  says  that  Swiss  troops,  p.   192.     The  French,  he 

It  required  a  quarter  of  an  hour  to  charge  says,  had  no  native  infantry  ;  il  regno  di 

and  fire  a  musket.     I  must  confess  that  I  Francia  era  debolissimo  di  fanteria  pro' 

very  much  doubt  the  fact  of  so  many  pria,  the  nobility  monopolizing  all  war 

muskets  having  been  collected.    In  1432  like  occupations.     Ibid, 
that  arm  was  seen  for  the  first  time  in 
Tuscany.     Muratori,  Dissert.  20.  p.  457 


462  FRANCESCO   SFORZA.      Chap.  III.  Part  ii 

rivalry,  which  descended  to  the  next  generation,  and  involved 
all  the  distinguished  leaders  of  Italy.  The  distractions  of 
Naples,  and  the  anarchy  of  the  ecclesiastical  state,  gave  scope 
not  only  to  their  military  hut  political  ambition.  Sforza  was 
invested  with  extensive  fiefs  in  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  and 
with  the  office  of  Great  Constable.  Braccio  aimed  at  inde- 
pendent acquisitions,  and  formed  a  sort  of  principality  around 
Perugia.  This,  however,  was  entirely  dissipated  at  his 
death.  When  Sforza  and  Braccio  were  no  more,  their  re- 
Francesco  spective  parties  were  headed  by  the  son  of  the 
Sforza.  former,  Francesco  Sforza,  and  by  Nicholas  Picci- 

nino,  who  for  more  than  twenty  years  fought,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, under  opposite  banners.  Piccinino  was  constantly 
in  the  service  of  Milan.  Sforza,  whose  political  talents  fully 
equalled  his  military  skill,  never  lost  sight  of  the  splendid 
prospects  that  opened  to  his  ambition.  From  Eugenius  IV. 
he  obtained  the  March  of  Ancona,  as  a  fief  of  the  Roman 
see.  Thus  rendered  more  independent  than  the  ordinary 
condottieri,  he  mingled  as  a  sovereign  prince  in  the  politics 
of  Italy.  He  Avas  generally  in  alliance  with  Venice  and 
Florence,  throwing  his  weight  into  their  scale  to  preserve  the 
balance  of  power  against  Milan  and  Naples.  But  his  ulti- 
mate designs  rested  upon  Milan.  Filippo  Maria,  duke  of 
that  city,  the  last  of  his  family,  had  only  a  natural  daughter, 
whose  hand  he  sometimes  offered  and  sometimes  withheld 
from  Sforza.  Even  after  lie  had  consented  to  their  union, 
He  acquires  n*s  suspicious  temper  was  incapable  of  admitting 
the  duchy  such  a  son-in-law  into  confidence,  and  he  joined  in 
a  confederacy  with  the  pope  and  king  of  Naples  to 
strip  Sforza  of  the  March.  At  the  death  of  Filippo  Maria 
in  1447,  that  general  had  nothing  left  but  his  glory,  and  a 
very  disputable  claim  to  the  Milanese  succession.  This,  how- 
ever, was  set  aside  by  the  citizens,  who  revived  their  republi- 
can government.  A  republic  in  that  part  of  Lombardy 
might,  with  the  help  of  Venice  and  Florence,  have  withstood 
any  domestic  or  foreign  usurpation.  But  Venice  was  hostile, 
and  Florence  indifferent.  Sforza  became  the  general  of  this 
new  state,  aware  that  such  would  be  the  probable  means  of 
becoming  its  master.  No  politician  of  that  age  scrupled  any 
breach  of  faith  for  his  interest.  Nothing,  says  Machiavel, 
was  thought  shameful,  but  to  fail.  Sforza,  with  his  army, 
deserted  to  the  Venetians  ;  and  the  republic  of  Milan,  being 


Italy.  REBELLION  OF  SICILY.  163 

both  incapable  of  defending  itself  and  distracted  by  civil  dis- 
sensions, soon  fell  a  prey  to  bis  ambition.  In  1450  he  was 
proclaimed  duke,  rather  by  right  of  election,  or  of  conquest, 
than  in  virtue  of  his  marriage  Avith  Bianca,  whose  sex,  a3 
well  as  illegitimacy,  seemed  to  preclude  her  from  inheriting. 

I  have  not  alluded  for  some  time  to  the  domestic  history 
of  a  kingdom  which  bore  a  considerable  part,  dur-  Affairs  (f 
ing  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  in  the  NaPles- 
general  combinations  of  Italian  policy,  not  wishing  to  inter- 
rupt the  reader's  attention  by  too  frequent  transitions.     We 
must  return  again  to  a  more  remote  age  in  order  to  take  up 
the  history  of  Naples.     Charles  of  Anjou,  after 
the  deaths  of  Manfred  and  Conraclin  had  left  him 
without  a  competitor,  might  be  ranked  in  the  first  class  of 
European  sovereigns.     Master  of  Provence  and  Naples,  and 
at  the  head  of  the  Guelf  faction  in  Italy,  he  had  already 
prepared  a  formidable  attack  on  the  Greek  empire,  when  a 
memorable  revolution  in  Sicily  brought  humiliation  on  his 
latter  years.     John  of  Procida,  a  Neapolitan,  whose  patri- 
mony had  been  confiscated  for  his  adherence  to  Rebellion 
the  party  of  Manfred,  retained,  during  long  years  £f0^cily 
of  exile,   an   implacable   resentment   against  the  Charles 
house  of  Anjou.     From  the  dominions  of  Peter  of  AnJ0U- 
III.,  king  of  Aragon,  who  had  bestowed  estates  upon  him  in 
Valencia,  he  kept  his  eye  continually  fixed  on  Naples  and 
Sicily.     The  former  held  out  no  favorable  prospects  ;    the 
Ghibelin  party  had  been  entirely  subdued,  and  the  principal 
barons  were  of  French  extraction  or  inclinations.     But  the 
island  was  in  a  very  different  state.     Unused  to  any  strong 
government,  it  was  now  treated  as  a  conquered  country.     A 
large  body  of  French  soldiers  garrisoned  the  fortified  towns, 
and  the  systematic  oppression  was  aggravated  by  those  in- 
sults upon  the  honor  of  families  which  are  most  intolerable 
to  an  Italian  temperament.     John  of  Procida,  travelling  in 
disguise  through  the    island,    animated    the   barons  with   a 
hope  of  deliverance.     In  like   disguise  he  repaired  to  the 
pope,  Nicolas  III.,  who  was  jealous  of  the  new  Neapolitan 
dynasty,  and  obtained  his  sanction  to  the  projected  insurrec- 
tion ;  to  the  court  of  Constantinople,  from  which  he  readily 
obtained  money ;  and  to  the  king  of  Aragon,  who  employed 
that  money  in  fitting  out  an  armament,  that  hovered  upon 
'he  coast  of  Africa,  under  pretext  of  attacking  the  Moors 


464  SICILIAN   VESPERS.         Chap.  III.  Pabt  11 

It  is,  however,  difficult  at  this  time  to  distinguish  the  effects 
of  preconcerted  conspiracy  from  those  of  casual  resentment. 
Before  the  intrigues  >o  skilfully  conducted  had  taken  effect, 
yet  after  they  were  ripe  for  development,  an  outrage  commit- 
ted upon  a  lady  at  Palermo,  during  a  procession  on  the  vigil 
of  Easter,  provoked  the  people  to  thai  terrible  massacre  of 
Sicilian  all  the  French  in  their  island  which  has  obtained 

Vespers.  the  name  of  Sicilian  Vespers.  Unpremeditated 
as  such  an  ebullition  of  popular  fury  must  appear,  it  fell  in 

1283  ky  the  happiest  coincidence,  with  the  previous  con- 
spiracy. The  king  of  Aragon's  fleet  was  at  hand ; 
the  Sicilians  soon  called  in  his  assistance  ;  he  sailed  to  Paler- 
mo, and  accepted  the  crown.  John  of  Procida  is  a  remarka- 
ble witness  to  a  truth  which  the  pride  of  governments  will 
seldom  permit  them  to  acknowledge  :  that  an  individual,  ob- 
scure and  apparently  insignificant,  may  sometimes,  by  perse- 
verance and  energy,  shake  the  foundations  of  established 
states ;  while  the  perfect  concealment  of  his  intrigues  proves 
also,  against  a  popular  maxim,  that  a  political  secret  may  be 
preserved  by  a  number  of  persons  during  a  considerable 
length  of  time.1 

The  long  war  that  ensued  upon  this  revolution  involved  or 
War  in  interested  the  greater  pa*rt  of  civilized  Europe, 

consequence    Philip  HI.  of  France  adhered  to  his  uncle,  and  the 

between  *-  ' 

France  and  king  of  Aragon  was  compelled  to  fight  for  Sicily 
dragon.  within  his  native  dominions.  This  indeed  was  the 
more  vulnerable  point  of  attack.  Upon  the  sea  he  was  lord 
of  the  ascendant.  His  Catalans,  the  most  intrepid  of  Med- 
iterranean sailors,  were  led  to  victory  by  a  Calabrian  refu- 
gee, Roger  di  Loria,  the  most  illustrious  and  successful 
admiral  whom  Europe  produced  till  the  age  of  Blake  and  de 
Ruyter.  In  one  of  Loria's  battles  the  eldest  son  of  the  king 
of  Naples  was  made  prisoner,  and  the  first  years  of  his  own 

1  Oiannone,   though  he  has   well  de-  Palermo.      The    thought    of   calliug    in 

scribed  the  schemes  of  John  of  Procida,  Peter,  he  asserts,  did  not  occur  to  the 

yet,  as  is  too  often  his  custom,  or  rather  Sicilians  till  Charles  had  actually7  coin- 

thnt  of  Costanzo,  whom  he  implicitly  fol-  menced  the  siege  of  Messina.     But  this 

lows,  drops  or  slides  over  leading  facts;  is    e  jually    removed    from     the    truth, 

and  thus,  omitting  entirely,  or  misrepre-  Gibbon  has  made  more  errors  thau  are 

senting  the  circumstances  of  the  Sicilian  usual  with  so  accurate  an  historian  in 

Vespers,  treats  the  whole  insurrection  as  his  account  of  this  revolution,  such  as 

the    result  of  a  deliberate    conspiracy,  calling  Constance,  the  queen  of  Peter, 

On  the  other  hand,  Nicolas  Specialis,  a  sister   instead    of  daughter  of  Manfred, 

contemporary  writer,  in  the  seventh  vol-  A  good  narrative  of  the  Sicilian  Vespers 

ume  of  Muratori's  collection,  represents  may    be    found    in    Velly's    History    o. 

the  Sicilian  Vespers  as  proceeding  entirely  Frauce,  t.  vi. 
from  the  casual  outrage  in  the  streets  of 


Italy.  WAR  BETWEEN  FRANCE  AND  ARAGON.  463 

reign  were  spent  in  confinement.  But  notwithstanding  these 
advantages,  it  was  found  impracticable  for  Aragon  to  contend 
against  the  arms  of  France,  and  latterly  of  Castile,  sustained 
by  the  rolling  thunders  of  the  Vatican.  Peter  III.  had  be- 
queathed Sicily  to  his  second  son  James  ;  Alfonso,  the  eldest, 
king  of  Aragon,  could  not  fairly  be  expected  to  ruin  his  in- 
heritance for  his  brother's  cause  ;  nor  were  the  barons  of  that 
free  country  disposed  to  carry  on  a  war  without  national  ob- 
jects. He  made  peace,  accordingly,  in  1295,  and  engaged 
to  withdraw  all  his  subjects  from  the  Sicilian  service.  Upon 
his  own  death,  which  followed  very  soon,  James  succeeded  to 
the  kingdom  of  Aragon,  and  ratified  the  renunciation  of  Sic- 
ily. But  the  natives  of  that  island  had  received  too  deeply 
the  spirit  of  independence  to  be  thus  assigned  over  by  the 
letter  of  a  treaty.  After  solemnly  abjuring,  by  their  ambas- 
sadors, their  allegiance  to  the  king  of  Aragon,  they  placed  the 
crown  upon  the  head  of  his  brother  Frederic.  They  main- 
tained the  war  against  Charles  II.  of  Naples,  against  James 
of  Aragon,  their  former  king,  who  had  bound  himself  to  en- 
force their  submission,  and  even  against  the  great  Roger  di 
Loria,  who,  upon  some  discontent  with  Frederic,  deserted 
their  banner,  and  entered  into  the  Neapolitan  service.  Peace 
was  at  length  made  in  1300,  upon  condition  that  Frederic 
should  retain  during  his  life  the  kingdom,  which  was  after- 
wards to  revert  to  the  crown  of  Naples :  a  condition  not 
likely  to  be  fulfilled. 

Upon  the  death  of  Charles  II.  king  of  Naples,  in  1305,  a 
question  arose  as  to  the  succession.  His  eldest  son,  Charles 
Martel,  had  been  called  by  maternal  inheritance  to  the  throne 
of  Hungary,  and  had  left  at  his  decease  a  son,  Carobert,  the 
reigning  sovereign  of  that  country.  According  to  the  laws 
of  representative  succession,  which  were  at  this  time  tolerably 
settled  in  private  inheritance,  the  crown  of  Naples  ought  to 
have  regularly  devolved  upon  that  prince.  But  it  Robert  king 
was  contested  by  his  uncle  Robert,  the  eldest  living  of  NaPlea- 
son  of  Charles  II.,  and  the  cause  was  pleaded  by  civilians  at 
Avignon  before  Pope  Clement  V.,  the  feudal  superior  of  the 
Neapolitan  kingdom.  Reasons  of  public  utility,  rather  than 
of  legal  analogy,  seem  to  have  prevailed  in  the  decision 
which  was  made  in  favor  of  Robert.1     The  course  of  hi  a 

1  Giannone,  1.  xxii. ;  Summonte,  t.  ii.  p.  370.     Some  of  the  civilians  of  that  ago 
however,  approved  the  decision. 
VOL.  I.  —  M.  30 


466  ROBERT   KING   OF   NAPLES.      Chap.  III.  Part  II. 

reign  evinced  the  wisdom  of  this  determination.  Robert,  a 
wise  and  active,  though  not  personally  a  martial  prince,  main- 
tained the  ascendency  of  the  Guelf  faction,  and  the  papal 
influence  connected  with  it.  against  the  formidable  combina- 
tion of  Ghibelin  usurpers  in  Lombardy,  and  the  two  empe- 
rors Henry  VII.  and  Louis  of  Bavaria.  No  male  i<-ue 
survived  Robert,  whose  crown  de-cended  to  his  granddaughter 
Joanna.  She  had  been  espoused,  while  a  child,  lo  her  cousin 
Andrew,  son  of  Carobert  king  of  Hungary,  who  was  educated 
with  her  in  the  court  of  Naples.  Auspiciously  contrived  as 
this  union  might  seem  to  silence  a  subsisting  claim  upon  the 
kingdom,  it  proved  eventually  the  source  of  civil  war  and 
calamity  for  a  hundred  and  fifty  years.  Andrew's  manners 
were  barbarous,  more  worthy  of  his  native  country  than  of 
that  polished  court  wherein  he  had  been  bred.  He  gave 
himself  up  to  the  society  of  Hungarians,  who  taught  him  to 
believe  that  a  matrimonial  crown  and  derivative  royalty  were 
derogatory  to  a  prince  who  claimed  by  a  paramount  hered- 
1343        itary  right.     In  fact,  he  was  pressing  the  court  of 

Avignon  to  permit  his  own  coronation,  which  would 
have  placed  in  a  very  hazardous  condition  the  rights  of  the 
queen,  with  whom  he  was  living  on  ill  terms,  when  one  night 
he  was  seized,  strangled,  and  thrown  out  of  a  window.  Public 
Joanna  rumor,  in  the  absence  of  notorious  proolj  imputed 

Murder  of  the  guilt  of  this  mysterious  assassination  to  Joanna. 
An1dreJwband   Whether  historians  are  authorized  to  assume  her 

participation  in  it  so  confidently  as  they  have  gen- 
erally done,  may  perhaps  be  doubted ;  though  I  cannot  ven- 
ture positively  to  rescind  their  sentence.  The  circumstances 
of  Andrew's  death  were  undoubtedly  pregnant  with  strong 
suspicions.1     Louis  king  of  Hungary,  his  brother,  a  just  and 

1  The    Chronicle  of  Dominic  di    Gra-  unlikely  that  Joanna  should  he  so  too} 

vina  (Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  xii.)  seems  to  because  she  was  on  very  bad  terms  with 

be  our  best  testimony  for  the  circum-  him,  and  indeed  the  chief  proofs  against 

stances  connected  with  Andrew's  death ;  her  are  founded    on    the    investigation 

and  after    reading    his    narrative    more  which  Durazzo  himself  professed  to  in- 

than  once,  I  find  myself  undecided  as  to  stitute.     Confessions  obtained    through 

this    perplexed    and    mysterious    story,  torture  are  a*  little  credible  in  history  as 

Gravina"s  opinion,  it  should  be  observed,  they  ought  to  be  in  judicature  ;  even  ii 

is    extremely    hostile     to     the     queen,  we  could  be  positively  sure,  which  is  not 

Nevertheless  there  are  not  wanting  pre-  the  case  in  this  instance,  that  such  con 

sumptions  that   Charles,   first    duke   of  fusions  were  ever  made.     However,  I  do 

Durazzo,  who  had  married  the  sister  of  not  pretend  to  acquit  Joanna,  but  merely 

Andrew,  was  concerned  in  his  murder,  to  notice  the  uncertainty  that  rests  over 

for  which  iu  fact  he  was  afterwards  put  her  story,  on  account  of  the  positiveness 

to  death  by  the  king  of  Hungary.     But,  with  which  all  historians,  except  those 

If  the  duke  of  Durazzo  was  guilty,  it  is  of  Naples  and  the  Abbe  de  Sade,  who** 


ITALY.  J0A1TNA.  46? 

stern  prim*,,  invaded  Naples,  partly  as  an  avenger,  partly  as 
a  conqueror.  The  queen  and  her  second  husband,  Louis  of 
Tarento,  fled  to  Provence,  where  her  acquittal,  after  a  solemn, 
if  not  an  impartial,  investigation,  was  pronounced  by  Clement 
VI.  Louis,  meanwhile,  found  it  more  difficult  to  retain  than 
to  acquire  the  kingdom  of  Naples  ;  his  own  dominion  required 
his  presence ;  and  Joanna  soon  recovered  her  crown.  She 
reigned  for  thirty  years  more  without  the  attack  of  any 
enemy,  but  not  intermeddling,  like  her  progenitors,  in  the 
general  concerns  of  Italy.  Childless  by  four  husbands,  the 
succession  of  Joanna  began  to  excite  ambitious  speculations. 
Of  all  the  male  descendants  of  Charles  I.  none  remained  but 
the  king  of  Hungary,  and  Charles  duke  of  Durazzo,  who 
had  married  the  queen's  niece,  and  was  regarded  by  her  as 
the  presumptive  heir  to  the  crown.  But,  offended  by  her 
marriage  with  Otho  of  Brunswick,  he  procured  the  assistance 
of  an  Hungarian  army  to  invade  the  kingdom,  and,  getting 
the  queen  into  his  power,  took  possession  of  the  throne.  In 
this  enterprise  he  was  seconded  by  Urban  VI.,  against  whom 
Joanna  had  unfortunately  declared  in  the  great  schism  of  the 
church.  She  was  smothered  with  a  pillow,  in  prison,  by  the 
order  of  Charles.  The  name  of  Joan  of  Naples 
has  suffered  by  the  lax  repetition  of  calumnies. 
Whatever  share  she  may  have  had  in  her  husband's  death, 
and  certainly  under  circumstances  of  extenuation,  her  sub- 
sequent life  was  not  open  to  any  flagrant  reproach.  The 
charge  of  dissolute  manners,  so  frequently  made,  is  not 
warranted  by  any  specific  proof  or  contemporary  testi- 
mony. 

In  the  extremity  of  Joanna's  distress  she  had  sought  assist- 
ance from  a  quarter  too  remote  to  afford  it  in  time  for  her 
relief.  She  adopted  Louis  duke  of  Anjou,  eldest  House  of 
uncle  of  the  young  king  of  France,  Charles  VI.,  as  AnJ°u- 
her  heir  in  the  kingdom  of  Naples  and  county  of  Provence. 
This  bequest  took  effect  without  difficulty  in  the  latter  coun- 
try. Naples  was  entirely  in  the  possession  of  Charles  of 
Durazzo.  Louis,  however,  entered  Italy  with  a  very  large 
army,  consisting  at  least  of  30,000  cavalry,  and,  according  to 
some   writers,  more  than  double  that   number.1      He   was 

vindication  (Vie  de  Petrarque,  t.  ii.  notes)    been  her  own  act,  as  if  she  had  ordered 

does  her  more  harm   than  good,  have    his  execution  in  open  day. 

issurued  the  murder  of  Andrew  to  have        i  Muratori ;  Summonte  ;  Costanzo. 


468  LADISLAUS.  Chap.  III.  Pabt  II 

joined  by  many  Neapolitan  barons  attached  to  the  lute 
queen  But,  by  a  fate  not  unusual  in  so  imperfect  a  state 
of  military  science,  this  armament  produced  no  adequate 
effect,  and  mouldered  away  through  disease  and  want  of 
provisions.  Louis  himself  dying  not  long  afterwards,  the 
government  of  Charles  III.  appeared  secure,  and  he  was 
tempted  to  accept  an  offer  of  the  crown  of  Hungary.  This 
enterprise,  equally  unjust  and  injudicious,  terminated  in  his 
assassination.  Ladislaus,  his  son,  a  child  ten  years  old,  suc- 
ceeded to  the  throne  of  Naples,  under  the  guardianship  of 
his  mother  Margaret,  whose  exactions  of  money  producing 
discontent,  the  party  which  had  supported  the  late  duke  of 
Anjou  became  powerful  enough  to  call  in  his  son.  Louis  II., 
as  he  was  called,  reigned  at  Naples,  and  possessed  most  part 
of  the  kingdom,  for  several  years;  the  young  king  Ladislaus, 
who  retained  some  of  the  northern  provinces,  fixing  his  resi- 
dence at  Gaeta.  If  Louis  had  prosecuted  the  war  with 
activity,  it  seems  probable  that  he  would  have  subdued  his 
adversary.  But  his  character  was  not  very  energetic ;  and 
Ladislaus,  as  he  advanced  to  manhood,  displaying  much 
superior  qualities,  gained  ground  by  degrees,  till  the  Ange- 
vin barons,  perceiving  the  turn  of  the  tide,  came  over  to  his 
banner,  and  he  recovered  his  Avhole  dominions. 

The  kingdom  of  Naples,  at  the  close  of  the  fourteenth 

century,  was  still  altogether  a  feudal  government. 

This  had  been  introduced  by  the  first  Norman 
kings,  and  the  system  had  rather  been  strengthened  than 
impaired  under  the  Angevin  line.  The  princes  of  the  blood, 
who  were  at  one  time  numerous,  obtained  extensive  domains 
by  way  of  appanage.  The  principality  of  Tarento  was  a 
large  portion  of  the  kingdom.1  The  rest  was  occupied  by 
some  great  families,  whose  strength,  as  well  as  pride,  was 
shown  in  the  number  of  men-at-arms  whom  they  could  mus- 
ter under  their  banner.  At  the  coronation  of  Louis  II.,  in 
1390,  the  Sanseverini  appeared  with  1800  cavalry  completely 
equipped.2  This  illustrious  house,  which  had  filled  all  the 
high  offices  of  state,  and  changed  kings  at  its  pleasure,  was 
crushed  by  Ladislaus,  whose  bold  and  unrelenting  spirit  well 

i  It  comprehended  the  provinces  now  1463,  had  4000  troops  in  arms,  and  th« 

called  Terra  d'Otranto  and  Terra  di  Bari  ;  value   of   1,000,000  florins  in   movables 

beakiss  part  of  those  adjoining.    Sum-  Sismondi,  t.  x.  p.  151. 

monte,  Istoria  di  Napoli,  t.  iii.  p.  537.  -  Summoute,  t.  iii.  p.  517;  Gianncn* 

Orsini    prince  of  Tarento,   who  died  in  1.  xxiv.  c.  4. 


Italy  JOANNA   II.  469 

fitted  him  to  bruise  the  heads  of  the  aristocratic  hydra. 
Alter  thoroughly  establishing  his  government  at  home,  this 
ambitious  monarch  directed  his  powerful  resources  towards 
foreign  conquests.  The  ecclesiastical  territories  had  never 
been  secure  from  rebellion  or  usurpation ;  but  legitimate 
sovereigns  had  hitherto  respected  the  patrimony  of  the  head 
of  the  church.  It  was  reserved  for  Ladislaus,  a  feudal  vas- 
sal of  the  Holy  See,  to  seize  upon  Rome  itself  as  his  spoil. 
For  several  years,  while  the  disordered  state  of  the  church, 
in  consequence  of  the  schism  and  the  means  taken  to  extin- 
guish it,  gave  him  an  opportunity,  the  king  of  Naples  occu- 
pied great  part  of  the  papal  territories.  He  was  disposed  to 
have  carried  his  arms  farther  north,  and  attacked  the  republic 
rf  Florence,  if  not  the  states  of  Lombardy,  when  his  death 
relieved  Italy  from  the  danger  of  this  new  tyranny. 

An  elder  sister,  Joana  II.,  reigned  at  Naples  after  Ladis- 
laus. Under  this  queen,  destitute  of  courage  and 
understanding,  and  the  slave  of  appetites  which 
her  age  rendered  doubly  disgraceful,  the  kingdom  relapsed 
into  that  state  of  anarchy  from  which  its  late  sovereign  had 
rescued  it.  I  shall  only  refer  the  reader  to  more  enlarged 
histories  for  the  first  years  of  Joanna's  reign.  In  1421  the 
two  most  powerful  individuals  were  Sforza  Attendolo,  great 
constable,  and  Ser  Gianni  Caraccioli,  the  queen's  minion,  who 
governed  the  palace  with  unlimited  sway.  Sforza,  aware  that 
the  favorite  was  contriving  his  ruin,  and  remembering  the 
prison  in  which  he  had  lain  more  than  once  since  the  accession 
of  Joanna,  determined  to  anticipate  his  enemies  by  calling  in 
a  pretender  to  the  crown,  another  Louis  of  Anjou,  third  in 
descent  of  that  unsuccessful  dynasty.  The  Angevin  party, 
though  proscribed  and  oppressed,  was  not  extinct ;  and  the 
populace  of  Naples  in  particular  had  always  been  on  that 
side.  Caraccioli's  influence  and  the  queen's  dishonorable 
weakness  rendered  the  nobility  disaffected.  Louis  III.,  there- 
fore, had  no  remote  prospect  of  success.  But  Caraccioli  was 
more  prudent  than  favorites,  selected  from  such  motives,  have 
usually  proved.  Joanna  was  old  and  childless ;  the  reversion 
to  her  dominions  was  a  valuable  object  to  any  Adoption  of 
prince  in  Europe.     None  was  so  competent  to  as-  Alfonso  of 

.        ,  X1M     ,  i        •     n  -II  ii  Aragon. 

■Mst  ner,  or  so  likely  to  be  influenced  by  the  hope  Affairs  of 
of  succession,  as  Alfonso  king  of  Aragon  and  Sic-  Sicily> 
ily.     That  island,  after  the  reign  of  its  deliverer,  Frederic  I 


470  ALFONSO   OF  AKAGON.      Chap.  Ill    Part  II 

aad  unfortunately  devolved  upon  weak  or  infant  princes. 
One  great  family,  the  Chiaramonti,  had  possessed  itself  of 
half  Sicily ;  not  by  a  feudal  title  as  in  other  kingdoms,  but  as 
a  kiud  of  counter-sovereignty,  in  opposition  to  the  crown, 
thornm  affecting  rather  to  bear  arms  against  the  advisers  of 
their  kings  than  against  themselves.  The  marriage  of  Maria, 
queen  of  Sicily,  with  Martin,  son  of  the  king  of  Aragon,  put 
an  end  to  the  national  independence  of  her  country.  Dying 
without  issue,  she  left  the  crown  to  her  husband.  This  was 
consonant,  perhaps,  to  the  received  law  of  some  European 
kingdoms.  But,  upon  the  death  of  Martin,  in  1409,  his 
father,  also  named  Martin,  king  of  Aragon,  took  possession  as 
heir  to  his  son,  without  any  election  by  the  Sicilian  parlia- 
ment. The  Chiaramonti  had  been  destroyed  by  the  younger 
Martin,  and  no  party  remained  to  make  opposition.  Thus 
was  Sicily  united  to  the  crown  of  Aragon.  Alfonso,  who 
now  enjoyed  those  two  crowns,  gladly  embraced  the  proposals 
of  the  queen  of  Naples.  They  were  founded,  indeed,  on  the 
most  substantial  basis,  mutual  interest.  She  adopted  Alfonso 
as  her  son  and  successor,  while  he  bound  himself  to  employ 
his  forces  in  delivering  a  kingdom  that  was  to  become  his 
own.  Louis  of  Anjou,  though  acknowledged  in  several  prov- 
inces, was  chiefly  to  depend  upon  the  army  of  Sforza  ;  and  an 
army  of  Italian  mercenaries  could  only  be  kept  by  means 
which  he  was  not  able  to  apply.  The  king  of  Aragon,  there- 
fore, had  far  the  better  prospects  in  the  war,  when  one  of  the 
many  revolutions  of  this  reign  defeated  his  immediate  expec- 
tations. Whether  it  were  that  Alfonso's  noble  and  affable 
nature  afforded  a  contrast  which  Joanna  was  afraid  of  exhib- 
iting to  the  people,  or  that  he  had  really  formed  a  plan  to  an- 
ticipate his  succession  to  the  throne,  she  became  more  and 
more  distrustful  of  her  adopted  son,  till,  an  open  rupture  hav- 
its  revoca-  mg  taken  place,  she  entered  into  a  treaty  with  her 
tionin  hereditary  competitor,  Louis  of  Anjou,  and,  revok- 

Louis  of  ing  the  adoption  of  Alfonso,  substituted  the  French 
Anjou.  prince  in  his  room.     The  king  of  Aragon  was  dis- 

appointed by  this  unforeseen  stroke,  which,  uniting  the  Ange- 
vin faction  with  that  of  the  reigning  family,  made  it  imprac- 
ticable for  him  to  maintain  his  ground  for  any  length  of  time 
in  the  kingdom.  Joanna  reigned  for  more  than  ten  years 
without  experiencing  any  inquietude  from  the  pacific  spirit  of 
Louis,  who,  content  with  his  reversionary  hopes,  lived  as  a 


Italy.  ALFONSO  KING  OF  NAPLES.  471 

rort  of  exile  in  Calabria.1  Upon  his  death,  the  queen,  who 
did  not  long  survive  him,  settled  the  kingdom  on  his  brother 
Regnier.  The  Neapolitans  were  generally  disposed  to  exe- 
cute this  bequest.  But  Regnier  was  unluckily  at  that  time  a 
prisoner  to  the  duke  of  Burgundy;  and  though  his  wife  main- 
tained the  cause  with  great  spirit,  it  was  difficult  for  her,  or 
even  for  himself,  to  contend  against  the  king  of  Aragon,  who 
immediately  laid  claim  to  the  kingdom.  After  a  contest  of 
several  years,  Regnier,  having  experienced  the  treacherous 
and  selfish  abandonment  of  his  friends,  yielded  the  game  to 
his  adversary ;  and  Alfonso  founded  the  Aragonese  line 
of  sovereigns  at  Naples,  deriving  pretensions  more  splendid 
than  just  from  Manfred,  from  the  house  of  Suabia,  and  from 
Roger  Guiscard.2 

In  the  first  year  of  Alfonso's  Neapolitan  war  he  was  defeated 
and  taken  prisoner  by  a  fleet  of  the  Genoese,  who,  . 
as  constant  enemies  of   the    Catalans  in  all   the  king  of 
naval  warfare  of  the  Mediterranean,  had  willingly  NaPles- 
lent  their  aid  to  the  Angevin  party.      Genoa  was  at  this  time 
subject  to  Filippo  Maria  duke  of  Milan,  and  her  royal  cap- 
tive  was   transmitted  to  his  court.     But  here   the  brilliant 
graces  of  Alfonso's  character  won  over  his  conqueror,  who 
had  no  reason  to  consider  the  war  as  his  own  concern.     The 
king  persuaded  him,  on  the  contrary,  that  a  strict  alliance  with 
an  Aragonese  dynasty  in  Naples  against  the  pretensions  of 
any  French  claimant  would  be  the  true  policy  and  best  secu- 


i  Joanna's  great  favorite,  Caraccioli,  respectable  that  I  thought  it  worth  no- 
fell  a  victim  some  time  before  his  mis-  tice,  however  uninteresting  these  remote 
tress's  death  to  an  intrigue  of  the  palace ;  intrigues  may  appear  to  most  readers, 
the  duchess  of  Sessia,  a  new  favorite,  Joanna  soon  changed  her  mind  again, 
having  prevailed  on  the  feeble  old  queen  and  took  no  overt  steps  in  favor  of  Al- 
to permit  him  to  be  assassinated.    About  fonso. 

this  time  Alfonso  had  every  reasou  to  2  According  to  a  treaty  between  Fred- 
hope  for  the  renewal  of  the  settlement  eric  III.,  king  of  Sicily,  and  Joanna  I, 
in  his  favor.  Caraccioli  had  himself  of  Naples,  in  1363,  the  former  monarch 
opened  a  negotiation  with  the  king  of  was  to  assume  the  title  of  king  of  Trin- 
Aragon ;  and  after  his  death  the  duchess  acria.  leaving  the  original  style  to  the 
of  Sessia  embarked  in  the  same  cause.  Neapolitan  line.  But  neither  he  nor  his 
Joan  even  revoked  secretly  the  adoption  successors  in  the  island  ever  complied 
of  the  duke  of  An jou.  This  circumstance  with  this  condition,  or  entitled  them- 
might  appear  doubtful :  but  the  his-  selves  otherwise  than  kings  of  Sicily  ul- 
torian  to  whom  I  refer  has  published  tra  Pharum.  in  contradistinction  to  the 
the  act  ot  revocation  itself,  which  bears  other  kingdom,  which  they  denominated 
date  April  11th,  1433.  Zurita  (Annales  Sicily  citra  Pharum.  Alfonso  of  Aragon, 
ie  Aragon,  t.  iv.  p.  217)  admits  that  no  when  he  united  both  these,  was  the  first 
other  writer,  either  contemporary  or  sub-  who  took  the  title,  King  of  the  Two 
sequent,  has  mentioned  any  part  of  the  Sicilies,  which  his  successors  have  re* 
transaction,  which  must  have  been  kept  tained  ever  since.  Giannone,  t.  iii  u 
verv  aecret ;    but    his    authority   is    so  234. 


472  QUADRUPLE  LEAGUE.     Chap   III.  Part  U 

rity  of  Milan.  That  city,  which  he  had  entered  as  a  prisoner, 
he  left  as  a  friend  and  ally.  From  this  time  Filippo  Ma- 
ria Visconti  and  Alfonso  were  firmly  united  in  their  Italian 
politics,  and  formed  one  weight  of  the  balance  which  the  re- 
ms  con-  publics  of  Venice  and  Florence  kept  in  equipoise, 
nection  After  the  succession   of  Sforza  to  the  duchy  of 

with  iiian.  Mjiajj  the  same  alliance  was  generally  preserved. 
Sforza  had  still  more  powerful  reasons  than  his  predecessor 
for  excluding  the  French  from  Italy,  his  own  title  being  con- 
tested by  the  duke  of  Orleans,  who  derived  a  claim  from  his 
mother  Valentine,  a  daughter  of  Gian  Galeazzo  Visconti. 
But  the  two  republics  were  no  longer  disposed  towards  war. 
Florence  had  spent  a  great  deal  without  any  advantage  in  her 
contest  with  Filippo  Maria ; 1  and  the  new  duke  of  Milan  had 
been  the  constant  personal  friend  of  Cosmo  de'  Medici,  who 
altogether  influenced  that  republic  At  Venice,  indeed,  he 
had  been  regarded  with  very  different  sentiments  ;  the  senate 
had  prolonged  their  war  against  Milan  with  redoubled  ani- 
mosity after  his  elevation,  deeming  him  a  not  less  ambitious 
and  more  formidable  neighbor  than  the  Visconti.  But  they 
were  deceived  in  the  character  of  Sforza.  Conscious  that 
he  had  reached  an  eminence  beyond  his  early  hopes,  he  had 
no  care  but  to  secure  for  his  family  the  possession  of  Milan, 
without  disturbing  the  balance  of  Lombardy.  No  one  bet- 
ter knew  than  Sforza  the  faithless  temper  and  destructive 
politics  of  the  condottieri,  who.-e  interest  was  placed  in  the 
oscillations  of  interminable  war,  and  whose  defection  might 
shake  the  stability  of  any  government.  Without  peace  it 
was  impossible  to  break  that  ruinous  system,  and  accustom 
states  to  rely  upon  their  natural  resources.  Venice  had 
little  reason  to  expect  further  conquests  in  Lombardy  ;  and 
if  her  ambition  had  inspired  the  hope  of  them,  she  was  sum- 
moned by  a  stronger  call,  that  of  self-preservation,  to  defend 
her  numerous  and  dispersed  possessions  in  the  Levant  against 
the  arms  of  Mahomet  II.  All  Italy,  indeed,  felt  the  peril 
Quadruple  that  impended  from  that  side  ;  and  these  various 
league  of  motions  occasioned  a  quadruple  league  in  1455, 
between  the  king  of  Naples,  the  duke  of  Milan, 
and  the  two  republics,  for  the  preservation  of  peace  in  Italy. 
One  object  of  this  alliance,  and  the  prevailing  object  with 

'  The  war  ending  with   the  peaee  of     republic   of   Florence    3,500,000  florins 
Ferrara,  in  1428,  is  said  to  have  cost  frhe    Ammirato,  p.  1043. 


Italy.  FERDINAND.  473 

Alfonso,  was  the  implied  guarantee  of  his  succession  in  the 
kingdom  of  Naples  to  his  illegitimate  son  Ferdinand.  He 
had  no  lawful  issue  ;  and  there  seemed  no  reason  why  an  ac- 
quisition of  his  own  valor  should  pass  against  his  will  to  col- 
lateral heirs.  The  pope,  as  feudal  superior  of  the  kingdom, 
and  the  Neapolitan  parliament,  the  sole  competent  tribunal, 
confirmed  the  inheritance  of  Ferdinand.1  Whatever  may  be 
thought  of  the  claims  subsisting  in  the  house  of  Anjou,  there 
can  be  no  question  that  the  reigning  family  of  Aragon  were 
legitimately  excluded  from  the  throne  of  Naples,  though 
force  and  treachery  enabled  them  ultimately  to  obtain  it. 

Alfonso,  surnamed  the  Magnanimous,  was  by  far  the  most 
accomplished  sovereign  whom  the  fifteenth  century  character 
produced.    The  virtues  of  chivalry  were  combined  of  Alfonso 
in  him  with  the  patronage  of  letters,  and  with  more  than  their 
patronage,  a  real  enthusiasm  for  learning,  seldom  found  in  a 
king,  and  especially  in  one  so  active  and  ambitious.'2     This 
devotion  to  literature  was,  among  the  Italians  of  that  age, 
almost  as  sure  a  passport  to  general  admiration  as  his  more 
chivalrous  perfection.     Magnificence  in  architecture  and  the 
pageantry  of  a  splendid  court  gave  fresh  lustre  to  his  reign. 
The  Neapolitans  perceived  with  grateful  pride  that  he  lived 
almost  entirely  among  them,  in  preference  to  his  patrimonial 
kingdom,  and  forgave  the  heavy  taxes  which  faults  nearly 
allied  to  his  virtues,  profuseness  and  ambition,  compelled  him 
to  impose.3     But  they  remarked  a  very  different  character  in 
his  son.     Ferdinand  was  as  dark  and  vindictive  as 
his  father  was  affable  and  generous.     The  barons, 
who  had  many  opportunities  of  ascertaining  his  disposition, 
began,  immediately  upon  Alfonso's  death,  to  cabal  against  his 
succession,  turning  their  eyes  first  to  the  legitimate  branch 
of  the  family,  and,  on  finding  that  prospect  not  favorable,  to 
John,  titular  duke  of  Calabria,  son  of  Regnier  of     ^  ,.R, 
Anjou,  who  survived  to  protest  against  the  revolu- 
tion that  had  dethroned  him.    John  was  easily  prevailed  upon 
to  undertake  an  invasion  of  Naples.     Notwithstanding  the 
treaty  concluded  in  1455,  Florence  assisted  him  with  money, 
and  Venice  at  least  with  her  wishes  ;  but  Sforza  remained 
unshaken  in   that  alliance  with   Ferdinand  which  his  clear- 

i  Giannone,  1.  xxvi.  c.  2.  king  of  an  illness.     See  other  proofs  of 

2  A  story  is  told,  true  or  false,  that  his  his  love  of  letters  in  Tiraboschl    t    vf 

delight  in  hearing  Quiutus  Curtius  read,  p.  40. 

without  any  other  medicine,  cured  the        3  Giannone,  1.  xxvi. 


474 


STATE  OF   ITALY 


Chap    TIT.  Part  fl 


sighted  policy  discerned  to  be  the  best  safeguard  for  his  own 
dynasty.  A  large  proportion  of  the  Neapolitan  nobility, 
including  Orsini  prince  of  Tarento,  the  most  powerful  vassal 
of  the  crown,  raised  the  banner  of  Anjou,  which  was  sus- 
tained also  by  the  youngest  Piccinino,  t he  last  of  the  great 
condottieri,  under  whose  command  the  veterans  of  former 
warfare  rejoiced  to  serve.  But  John  underwent  the  fate  that 
had  always  attended  his  family  in  their  long  competition  for 
that  throne.  After  some  brilliant  successes,  his  want  of  re- 
sources, aggravated  by  the  defection  of  Genoa,  on  whose 
ancient  enmity  to  the  house  of  Aragon  he  had  relied,  was 
1464  perceived  by  the  barons  of  his  party,  who,  accord- 
ing to  the  practice  of  their  ancestors,  returned  one 
by  one  to  the  allegiance  of  Ferdinand. 

The  peace  of  Italy  was  little  disturbed,  except  by  a  few 
domestic  revolutions,  for  several  years  after  this 
Neapolitan  war.1  Even  the  most  short-sighted 
politicians  were  sometimes  withdrawn  from  selfish 
objects  by  the  appalling  progress  of  the  Turks, 
though  there  was  not  energy  enough  in  their  coun- 


State  of 
Italy  in  the 
latter  part 
of  the 
fifteenth 
century. 


1  The  following  distribution  of  a  tax 
of  458,000  florins,  imposed,  or  rather  pro- 
posed, in  1464,  to  defray  the  expense  of 
a  general  war  against  the  Turks,  will 
give  a  notion  of  the  relative  wealth  and 
resources  of  the  Italian  powers ;  but  it  is 
probable  that  the  pope  rated  himself 
above  his  fair  contingent.  He  was  to 
pav  100,000  florins ;  the  Venetians  100,- 
000;  Ferdinand  of  Naples  80,000;  the 
duke  of  Milan  70,000;  Florence  50,000; 
the  duke  of  Modena  20,000 ;  Siena  15,- 
000;  the  marquis  of  Mantua  10,000; 
Lucca  8,000  ;  the  marquis  of  Montferrat 
5,000.  Simondi,  t.  x.  p.  229.  A  similar 
assessment  occurs  (p.  307)  where  the  pro- 
portions are  not  quite  the  same. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  worth  while  to  ex- 
tract an  estimate  of  the  force  of  all 
Christian  powers,  written  about  1454, 
from  Sanuto's  Lives  of  the  Doges  of 
Venice,  p.  963.  Some  parts,  however, 
appear  very  questionable.  The  king  of 
France,  it  is  said,  can  raise  30,000  men- 
at-arms  ;  but  for  any  foreign  enterprise 
only  15,000.  The  king  of  England  can 
do  the  same.  These  powers  are  exactly 
equal ;  otherwise  one  of  the  two  would 
be  destroyed.  The  king  of  Scotland, 
uch'  e  signore  di  grandi  paesi  e  popoli 
con  grande  poverta,"  can  raise  10,000 
men-at-arms :  the  king  of  Norwxy  the 
same:  the  king  of  Spain  (Castile) 
J0,000:     the    king    of    Portugal     6000: 


the  duke  of  Savoy  8000 :  the  duke  of 
Milan  10,000.  The  republic  of  Venice 
can  pay  from  her  revenues  10,000  :  that 
of  Florence  4000  :  the  pope  6000.  The 
emperor  and  empire  can  raise  60,000 ; 
the  king  of  Hungary  80,000  (not  men- 
at-arms,  certainly). 

The  king  of  France,  in  1414,  had 
2,000,000  ducats  of  revenue ;  but  now 
only  half.  The  king  of  England  had 
then  as  much ;  now  only  700,000.  The 
king  of  Spain's  revenue  also  is  reduced 
by  the  wars  from  3,000,000  to  800,000. 
The  duke  of  Burgundy  had  3,000.000; 
now  900,000.  The  duke  of  Milan  had 
sunk  from  1,000,000  to  500,000  :  Venice 
from  1.100,000,  which  she  possessed  in 
1423.  to  800,000 :  Florence  from  400,000 
to  200,000. 

These  statistical  calculations,  which 
are  not  quite  accurate  as  to  Venice,  and 
probably  much  less  so  as  to  some  other 
states,  are  chiefly  remarkable  as  they 
manifest  that  comprehensive  spirit  of 
treating  all  the  powers  of  Europe  as 
parts  of  a  common  system  which  began 
to  actuate  the  Italians  of  the  fifteenth 
century.  Of  these  enlarged  views  of 
policy  the  writings  of  JEneas  Sylvius 
afford  an  eminent  instance.  Besides  the 
more  general  and  insensible  causes,  the 
increase  of  navigation  and  revival  of  lit- 
erature, this  may  be  ascribed  to  the  con- 
tinual danger  from  the  progress  of  thf 


lTAi.r.  AFFAIRS   OF  GENOA.  475 

cils  to  form  any  concerted  plans  for  their  own  security.    Venice 
maintained  a  long  but  ultimately  an  unsuccessful  contest  with 
Mahomet   II.  for  her  maritime   acquisitions  in   Greece  and 
Albania  ;  and  it  was  not  till  after  his  death  relieved  Italy  from 
its  immediate  terror  that  the  ambitious  republic  endeavored 
to  extend  its  territories  by  encroaching  on  the  house  of  Este. 
Nor  had  Milan  shown   much  disposition  towards 
aggrandizement.     Francesco  Sforza  had  been  suc- 
ceeded, such  is  the  condition  of  despotic  governments,  by  his 
son  Galeazzo,  a  tyrant  more  execrable  than  the  worst  of  the 
Visconti.     His  extreme  cruelties,  and  the  insolence  of  a  de- 
bauchery  that    gloried   in   the    public   dishonor   of  families, 
excited   a  few  daring   spirits   to   assassinate   him. 
The  Milanese  profited  by  a  tyrannicide  the  perpe- 
trators of  which  they  had  not  courage  or  gratitude  to  protect. 
The  regency  of  Bonne  of  Savoy,  mother  of  the  infant  duke 
Gian  Galeazzo,  deserved  the  praise  of  wisdom  and  modera- 
tion.    But  it  was  overthrown  in  a  few  years  by  Ludovico 
Sforza,  surnamed  the  Moor,  her  husband's  brother;        „„„„ 

.  A .D.   ItcuU 

who,  while  he  proclaimed  his  nephew's  majority 
and  affected  to  treat  him  as  a  sovereign,  hardly  disguised  in 
his  conduct  towards  foreign  states  that  he  had  usurped  for 
himself  the  sole  direction  of  government. 

The  annals  of  one  of  the  few  surviving  republics,  that  of 
Genoa,  present  to  us.  durino-  the  fifteenth  as  well  Affairs  of 

r  '  °  .  f.  Genoa  in 

as  the  preceding  century,  an  unceasing  series  of  that  age, 
revolutions,  the  shortest  enumeration  of  which  would  occupy 
several  pages.  Torn  by  the  factions  of  Adorni  and  Fregosi, 
equal  and  eternal  rivals,  to  whom  the  whole  patrician  families 
of  Doria  and  Fieschi  were  content  to  become  secondary, 
sometimes  sinking  from  weariness  of  civil  tumult  into  the 
grasp  of  Milan  or  France,  and  again,  from  impatience  of 
foreign  subjection,  starting  back  from  servitude  to  anarchy, 
the  Genoa  of  those  ages  exhibits  a  singular  contrast  to  the 
calm  and  regular  aristocracy  of  the  next  three  centuries. 
The  latest  revolution  within  the  compass  of  this  work  was 
in  1488,  when  the  duke  of  Milan  became  sovereign,  and 
Adorno  holding  the  office  of  doge  as  his  lieutenant. 

Florence,  the  most  illustrious  and  fortunate  of  Italian  re- 
ottoman  arms,  which  led  the  politicians    the  resources  and  dispositions  of  ChristiaJ 
3f  that  part  of  Europe  most  exposed  to    states 
^hem  into   more  extensive   views  as    tr 


476  AFFAIRS   OF  FLORENCE.    Chap.  Ill  Pabt  II. 

publics,  was  now  rapidly  descending  from  her  rank  anions 
and  of  free  commonwealths,  though  surrounded  with  more 

Florence  than    uguaj    lustre     jn    t^e    eveg     Q£    Europe.       We 

must  take  up  the  story  of  that  city  from  the  revolution  of 
1382,  which  restored  the  ancient  Guelf  aristocracy,  or  party 
of  the  Albizi,  to  the  ascendency  of  which  a  popular  insurrec- 
tion had  stripped  them.  Fifty  years  elapsed  during  which 
this  party  retained  the  government  in  its  own  hands  with  few 
attempts  at  disturbance.  Their  principal  adversaries  had  been 
exiled,  according  to  the  invariable  and  perhaps  necessary  cus- 
tom of  a  republic ;  the  populace  and  inferior  artisans  were 
dispirited  by  their  ill  success.  Compared  with  the  leaders  of 
other  factions,  Maso  degl'  Albizi,  and  Nicola  di  Uzzano,  who 
succeeded  him  in  the  management  of  his  party,  were  attached 
to  a  constitutional  liberty.  Yet  so  difficult  is  it  for  any  gov- 
ernment which  does  not  rest  on  a  broad  basis  of  public  con- 
sent to  avoid  injustice,  that  they  twice  deemed  it  necessary 
to  violate  the  ancient  constitution.  In  1393,  after  a  partial 
movement  in  behalf  of  the  vanquished  faction,  they  assembled 
a  parliament,  and  established  what  was  technically  called  at 
Florence  a  Balia.1  This  Avas  a  temporary  delegation  of  sov- 
ereignty to  a  number,  generally  a  considerable  number,  of 
citizens,  who  during  the  period  of  their  dictatorship  named 
the  magistrates,  instead  of  drawing  them  by  lot,  and  banished 
suspected  individuals.  A  precedent  so  dangerous  was  event- 
ually fatal  to  themselves  and  to  the  freedom  of  their  country. 
Besides  this  temporary  balia,  the  regular  scrutinies  periodi- 
cally made  in  order  to  replenish  the  bags  out  of  which  the 
names  of  all  magistrates  were  drawn  by  lot,  according  to  the 
constitution  established  in  1328,  were  so  managed  as  to  ex- 
clude all  persons  disaffected  to  the  dominant  faction.  But, 
for  still  greater  security,  a  council  of  two  hundred  was  formed 
in  1411,  out  of  those  alone  who  had  enjoyed  some  of  the 
higher  offices  within  the  last  thirty  years,  the  period  of  the 
aristocratical  ascendency,  through  which  every  proposition 
was  to  pass  before  it  could  be  submitted  to  the  two  legislative 
councils.2  These  precautions  indicate  a  government  conscious 
of  public  enmity;  and  if  the  Albizi  had  continued  to  sway 
tne  republic  of  Florence,  their  jealousy  of  the  people  would 
have  suggested  still  more  innovations,  till  the  constitution  had 

i  Ammirato,  p.  840  2  ib.  p.  961. 


Italy.  RISE  OF  THE  MEDICI.  477 

acquired,  in  legal  form  as  well  as  substance,  an  absolutely 
aristocratical  character. 

But,  while  crushing  with  deliberate  severity  their  avowed 
adversaries,  the  ruling  party  had  left  one  family  whose  pru- 
dence gave  no  reasonable  excuse  for  persecuting  Rise  of  the 
them,  and  whose  popularity  as  well  as  wealth  ren-  Medlcl- 
dered  the  experiment  hazardous.  The  Medici  were  among 
the  most  considerable  of  the  new  or  plebeian  nobility.  From 
the  first  years  of  the  fourteenth  century  their  name  not  very 
unfrequently  occurs  in  the  domestic  and  military  annals  of 
Florence.1  Salvestro  de'  Medici,  who  had  been  partially  im- 
plicated in  the  democratical  revolution  that  lasted  from  1378 
to  1382,  escaped  proscription  on  the  revival  of  the  Guelf 
party,  though  some  of  his  family  were  afterwards  banished. 
Throughout  the  long  depression  of  the  popular  faction  the 
house  of  Medici  was  always  regarded  as  their  consolation 
and  their  hope.  That  house  was  now  represented  by  Gio- 
vanni,2 whose  immense  wealth,  honorably  acquired  by  com- 
mercial dealings,  which  had  already  rendered  the  name  cele- 
brated in  Europe,  was  expended  with  liberality  and  magnifi- 
cence. Of  a  mild  temper,  and  averse  to  cabals,  Giovanni 
de'  Medici  did  not  attempt  to  set  up  a  party,  and  contented 
himself  with  repressing  some  fresh  encroachments  on  the 
popular  part  of  the  constitution  which  the  Albizi  were  dis- 
posed to  make.3  They,  in  their  turn,  freely  admitted  him  to 
that  share  in  public  councils  to  which  he  was  entitled  by  his 
eminence  and  virtues;  a  proof  that  the  spirit  of  their  admin- 
istration was  not  illiberally  exclusive.  But,  on  the  death  of 
Giovanni,  his  son  Cosmo  de'  Medici,  inheriting  his  father's 
riches  and  estimation,  with  more  talents  and  more  ambition, 
thought  it  time  to  avail  himself  of  the  popularity  belonging 
to  his  name.  By  extensive  connections  with  the  most  emi- 
nent men  in  Italy,  especially  with  Sforza,  he  came  to  be  con- 
sidered as  the  first  citizen  of  Florence.  The  oligarchy  were 
more  than  evei  unpopular.     Their  administration  since  1382 

i  The  Medici  &?e  enumerated  by  Vil-  Salvestro  de'  Medici.    Their  families  ar9 

lani  among  the  chiefs  of  the  Black  faction  said  per  lungo  tratto  allontanarsi.     Am- 

in  1304,  1.  viii.  c.  71.     One  of  that  family  mirato,  p.  992.     Nevertheless    his  being 

was  beheaded  by  order  of  the  duke  of  drawn    gonfalonier    in    1421    created    a 

Athens  in  1343,  1.   xii.  c.  2.     It  is  sin-  great  sensation  in  the  city,  and  prepared 

gular  that  Mr.  Roscoe  should  refer  their  the  way  to  the  subsequent  revolution 

first  appearance  in  history,  as  he  seems  Ibid.     Machiavelli,  1.  iv. 

to  do.  to  the  siege  of  Searperia  in  1351.  3  Machiavelli,  Istoria  Fiorent.  1.  iv 

*  Giovanni  was  not  nearly  related  to 


478  RISE  OF  THE  MEDICI.      Chat.  Ift.  Part  U 

had  indeed  been  in  general  eminently  successful  ;  the  acquisi- 
tion of  Pisa  and  of  other  Tuscan  cities  had  aggrandized  the 
republic,  while  from  the  port  of  Leghorn  her  ships  had  begun 
to  trade  with  Alexandria,  and  sometimes  to  contend  with  the 
Genoese.1  But  an  unprosperous  war  with  Lucca  diminished 
a  reputation  which  was  never  sustained  by  public  affection. 
Cosmo  and  his  friends  aggravated  the  errors  of  the  govern- 
ment, which  having  lost  its  wise  and  temperate  leader  Nicola 
di  Uzzano,  had  fallen  into  the  rasher  hand-  of  Rinaldo  degl' 
Albizi.  He  incurred  the  blame  of  being  the  first  aggressor 
in  a  struggle  which  had  become  inevitable.  Cosmo  was 
arrested  by  command  of  a  gonfalonier  devoted  to 

a  d   1433 

the  Albizi,  and  condemned  to  banishment.  But  the 
oligarchy  had  done  too  much  or  too  little.  The  city  was  full 
of  his  friends ;  the  honors  conferred  upon  him  in  his  exile 
attested  the  sentiments  of  Italy.  Next  year  he  was  recalled 
in  triumph  to  Florence,  and  the  Albizi  were  completely 
overthrown. 

It  is  vain  to  expect  that  a  victorious  faction  will  scruple 
to  retaliate  upon  its  enemies  a  still  greater  measure  of  in- 
justice than  it  experienced  at  their  hands.  The  vanquished 
have  no  rights  in  the  eyes  of  a  conqueror.  The  sword  of  re- 
turning exiles,  flushed  by  victory  and  incensed  by  suffering, 
fall-,  successively  upon  their  enemies,  upon  those  whom  they 
suspect  of  being  enemies,  upon  those  who  may  hereafter  be- 
come such.  The  Albizi  had  in  general  respected  the  legal 
forms  of  their  free  republic,  which  good  citizens,  and  per- 
haps themselves,  might  hope  one  day  to  see  more  effective 
The  Medici  made  all  their  government  conducive  to  heredi- 
tary monarchy.  A  multitude  of  noble  citizens  were  driven 
from  their  country ;  some  were  even  put  to  death.  A  balia 
was  appointed  for  ten  years  to  exclude  all  the  Albizi  from 
magistracy,  and,  for  the  sake  of  this  security  to  the  ruling 
fiction,  to  supersede  the  legitimate  institutions  of  the  republic. 

>  The  Florentines  sent  their  first  mer-  silk  and  cloth  of  gold  had  never  flourished 

•.hint-ship  to  Alexandria  in  1422,  with  so  much.    Architecture  shone  under  Bru- 

irreat  and  anxious  hopes.     V ray ers  were  nelleschi :  literature  under  heonardAretin 

ordered  for  the  success  of  the  republic  by  and  Filelfo.  p.  977.    There  is  some  truth 

sea,   and    an    embassy   despatched  with  in  M.  Sismondi's  remark,  that  the  Medici 

presents  to  conciliate  the  Sultan  of  Ba-  have  derived  part  of  their  glory  from  their 

bylon,  that  is.  of  Grand  Cairo.     Ammi-  predecessors  in  government,  whom  they 

rato.  p.  997.     Florence  had  never  before  subverted,  and  whom  they  have  rendered 

been  so  wealthy.     The  circulating  money  obscure.    But  the  Milanese  war,  breaking 

ckoned  (perhaps  extravagantly)  at  out  in  1423.  tended  a  good  deal  to  in> 

4-OOo.CM^  florins.     The  manufactures  of  poverish  the  city. 


Italy.  LORENZO  DE'   MEDICI.  479 

After  the  expiration  of  this  period  the  dictatorial  powei  wau 
renewed  on  pretence  of  fresh  danger,  and  this  was  repeated 
six  times  in  twenty-one  years.1  In  1455  the  constitutional 
mode  of  drawing  magistrates  was  permitted  to  revive,  against 
the  wishes  of  some  of  the  leading  party.  They  had^good 
reason  to  be  jealous  of  a  liberty  which  was  incompatible  with 
their  usurpation.  The  gonfaloniers,  drawn  at  random  from 
among  respectable  citizens,  began  to  act  with  an  indepen- 
dence to  which  the  new  oligarchy  was  little  accustomed. 
Cosmo,  indeed,  the  acknowledged  chief  of  the  party,  perceiv- 
ing that  some  who  had  acted  in  subordination  to  him  were 
looking  forward  to  the  opportunity  of  becoming  themselves  its 
leaders,  was  not  unwilling  to  throw  upon  them  the  unpopu 
laritv  attached  to  an  usurpation  by  which  he  had  maintained 
his  influence.  Without  his  apparent  participation,  though 
not  against  his  will,  the  free  constitution  was  again  suspended 
by  a  balia  appointed  for  the  nomination  of  magistrates ;  and 
the  regular  drawing  of  names  by  lot  seems  never  to  have 
been  restored.2  Cosmo  died  at  an  advanced  age  in  1464. 
His  son,  Piero  de'  Medici,  though  not  deficient  in  either  vir 
lues  or  abilities,  seemed  too  infirm  in  health  for  the  adminis- 
tration of  public  affairs.  At  least,  he  could  only  be  chosen 
by  a  sort  of  hereditary  title,  which  the  party  above  mentioned 
some  from  patriotic,  more  from  selfish  motives,  were  reluc 
tant  to  admit.  A  strong  opposition  was  raised  to  the  familj 
pretensions  of  the  Medici.  Like  all  Florentine  factions,  h 
trusted  to  violence  ;  raid  the  chance  of  arms,  was  not  in  its 
Favor.  From  this  revolution  in  1466,  when  some  of  the 
most  considerable  citizens  were  banished,  we  may  date  an 
acknowledged  supremacy  in  the  house  of  Medici,  the  chief 
of  which  nominated  the  regular  magistrates,  and  drew  to 
himself  the  whole  conduct  of  the  republic.3 

The  two  sons  of  Piero,  Lorenzo  and  Julian,  especially  the 
former,  though  young  at  their  father's  death,  assumed,  by  the 
request  of  their  friends,  the  reigns  of  government.  T 

n.,  ,         .  °  o  ,  Lorenzo 

was  impossible  that,  among  a   people  who  had  de'  Medici. 

so  many  recollections  to  attach  to  the  name  of  lib-  A-D' 1469, 

erty,  among  so  many  citizens  whom  their  ancient  constitution 

invited  to  public  trust,  the  control  of  a  single  family  should 

1  Machiavelli,  1.  t.  ;  Ammirato  The  two  latter  are  perpetual  references 

*  Ammirato,  t.  ii.  p.  82-87.  in  this  part  of  history,  where  no  othftr  if 

Ammirato,  p.  93;    Koscoe's  Lorenzo  made. 
•      \fedici.  ch.  2  :  Machiavelli  ;  Sismondi. 


480  LORENZO  DE'   MEDICI.     Chap.  III.  Part  11. 

excite  no  dis,-ati>faction ;  and  perhaps  their  want  of  any  posi- 
tive authority  heightened  the  appearance  of  usurpation  in 
their  influence.  But,  if  the  people's  wish  to  resign  their 
freedom  gives  a  title  to  accept  the  government  of  a  country, 
the  Medici  were  no  usurpers.  That  family  never  lost  the 
affections  of  the  populace.  The  cry  of  Palle,  Palle  (their 
armorial  distinction),  would  at  any  time  rouse  the  Florentines 
to  defend  the  chosen  patrons  of  the  republic.  If  their  sub- 
stantial influence  could  before  be  questioned,  the  conspiracy 
of  the  Pazzi,  wherein  Julian  perished,  excited  an  enthusiasm 
for  the  surviving  brother,  that  never  cea<ed  during  his  life. 
Nor  was  this  anything  unnatural,  or  any  severe  reproach  to 
Florence.  All  around,  in  Lombardy  and  Romagna,  the  lamp 
of  liberty  had  long  since  been  extinguished  in  blood.  The 
freedom  of  Siena  and  Genoa  was  dearly  purchased  by  revo- 
lutionary proscriptions ;  that  of  Venice  was  only  a  name. 
The  republic  which  had  preserved  longest,  and  with  greatest 
purity,  that  vestal  fire,  had  at  least  no  relative  degradation  to 
fear  in  surrendering  herself  to  Lorenzo  de'  Medici.  I  need 
not  in  this  place  expatiate  upon  wThat  the  name  instantly  sug- 
gests, the  patronage  of  science  and  art,  and  the  constellation 
of  scholars  and  poets,  of  architects  and  painters,  whose  re- 
flected beams  cast  their  radiance  around  his  head.  His  polit- 
ical reputation,  though  far  less  durable,  was  in  his  own  age 
as  conspicuous  as  that  which  he  acquired  in  the  history  of 
letters.  Equally  active  and  sagacious,  he  held  his  way 
through  the  varying  combinations  of  Italian  policy,  always 
with  credit,  and  generally  with  success.  Florence,  if  not  en- 
riched, was  upon  the  whole  aggrandized  during  his  adminis- 
tration, which  was  exposed  to  some  severe  storms  from  the 
unscrupulous  adversaries,  Sixtus  IV.  and  Ferdinand  of 
Naples,  whom  he  was  compelled  to  resist.  As  a  patriot,  in- 
deed, we  never  can  bestow  upon  Lorenzo  de'  Medici  the 
meed  of  disinterested  virtue.  He  completed  that  subversion 
of  the  Florentine  republic  which  his  twro  immediate  ancestors 
had  so  well  prepared.  The  two  councils,  her  regular  legisla- 
ture, he  superseded  by  a  permanent  senate  of  seventy  per 
sons;1  while  the  gonfalonier  and  priors,  become  a  mockery 

i  Ammirato,   p.   145.     Machiavel  says  were   now   abolished,  yet   from   M.    Sis- 

(1.  viii.)  that  this  was  done  ristringere  il  mondi,  t.  xi.  p.  186,  who  quotes  an  author 

governo,  e  che  ledeliberazioni  iniportanti  I  have   not,  seen,  and  from  Nardi,  p.  7, 

si  ridueessero  in  minore   numero.      But  I  should  infer  that  they  ^ till   formallv 

though   it   rather   appears  from   Ammi-  subsisted. 
rate's  expressions  that  the  two  councils 


Italy.  PRETENSIONS   OF  FRANCE.  481 

aDd  pageant  to  keep  up  the  illusion  of.  liberty,  were  taught 
that  in  exercising  a  legitimate  authority  without  the  sanction 
of  their  prince,  a  name  now  first  heard  at  Florence,  they  in- 
curred the  risk  of  punishment  for  their  audacity.1  Even  the 
total  dilapidation  of  his  commercial  wealth  was  repaired  at  the 
cost  of  the  state ;  and  the  republic  disgracefully  screened  the 
bankruptcy  of  the  Medici  by  her  own.2  But  compared  with 
the  statesmen  of  his  age,  we  can  reproach  Lorenzo  with 
no  heinous  crime.  He  had  many  enemies ;  his  descendants 
had  many  more ;  but  no  unequivocal  charge  of  treachery  or 
assassination  has  been  substantiated  against  his  memory.  By 
the  side  of  Galea zzo  or  Ludovico  Sforza,  of  Ferdinand  or 
his  son  Alfonso  of  Naples,  of  the  pope  Sixtus  IV.,  ,.99 
he  shines  with  unspotted  lustre.  So  much  was 
Lorenzo  esteemed  by  his  contemporaries,  that  his  premature 
death  has  frequently  been  considered  as  the  cause  of  those 
unhappy  revolutions  that  speedily  ensued,  and  which  his  fore- 
sight would,  it  was  imagined,  have  been  able  to  prevent ;  an 
opinion  which,  whether  founded  in  probability  or  otherwise, 
attests  the  common  sentiment  about  his  character. 

If  indeed  Lorenzo  de'  Medici  could  not  have  changed  the 
destinies  of  Italy,  however   premature   his   death  „ 

Pre  tensions 

may  appear  if  we  consider  the  ordinary  duration  of  France 
of  human  existence,  it  must  be  admitted  that  for  upon  NaPlea 

1  Cambi,  a  gonfalonier  of  justice,  had,  debt  was  diminished  one  half.  Man; 
In  concert  with  the  priors,  admonished  charitable  foundations  were  suppressed 
some  public  officers  for  a  breach  of  duty.  The  circulating  specie  was  taken  at  one 
Fu  giudicato  questo  atto  molto  superbo,  fifth  below  its  nominal  value  in  paynieu'. 
says  Ammirato,  che  senza  participazione  of  taxes,  while  the  government  continued 
di  Lorenzo  de'  Medici,  principe  del  go-  to  issue  it  at  its  former  rate.  Thus  was 
verno,  fosse  seguito,  che  in  Pisa  in  quel  Lorenzo  reimbursed  a  part  of  his  loss  at 
tempo  si  ritrovava.  p.  1S4.  The  goufa-  the  expense  of  all  his  fellow-citizens.  Sis- 
lonier  was  fined  for  executing  his  con-  mondi,  t.  xi.  p.  347.  It  is  slightly  alluded 
Btitutional  functions.     This  was  a  down-  to  by  Machiavel. 

right  confession  that  the  republic  was  at        The  vast  expenditure  of  the  Medici  for 

an  end;  and  all  it  provokes  M.  Sismondi  the  sake  of  political  influence  would  of 

to  say  is  not  too  much,  t.  xi.  p.  345.  itself    have   absorbed    all    their   profits 

2  Since  the  Medici  took  on  them-  Cosmo  is  said  by  Guicciardini  to  have 
selves  the  character  of  princes,  they  had  spent  400,000  ducats  in  building  churches, 
forgotten  how  to  be  merchants.  But,  monasteries,  and  other  public  works 
imprudently  enough,  they  had  not  dis-  1.  i.  p.  91.  The  expenses  of  the  family 
continued  their  commerce,  which  was  between  1434  and  1471,  in  buildings, 
of  course  mismanaged  by  agents  whom  charities,  and  taxes  alone,  amounted  tc 
they  did  not  overlook.  The  consequence  663,755  florins  ;  equal  in  value,  according 
was  the  complete  dilapidation  of  their  to  Sismondi,  to  32.000,000  francs  at  pres- 
vast  fortune.  The  public  revenues  had  ent.  Hist,  des  ttepubl.  t.  x.  p.  173. 
been  for  some  years  applied  to  make  up  They  seem  to  have  advanced  moneys 
its  deficiencies.  But  from  the  measures  imprudently,  through  their  agents,  to 
adopted  by  the  republic,  if  we  may  still  Edward  IV.,  who  was  not  the  best  of- 
use  that  name,  she  should  appear  to  have  debtors.  Comines,  Mem.de Charles  VIII 
considered  herself,  rather  than  Lorenzo,  1.  vii.  c.  6. 

us  the  debtor.    The  interest  of  the  public 
VOL.  I.  — M.  31 


482  PRETENSIONS   OF  FRANCE     Chap.  III.  Part  II 

his  own  welfare,  perhaps  for  his  glory,  he  had  lived  out  the 
full  measure  of  his  time.  An  age  of  new  and  uncommon 
revolutions  was  about  to  arise,  among  the  earliest  of  which 
the  temporary  downfall  of  his  family  was  to  be  reckoned. 
The  long-contested  succession  of  Naples  was  again  to  involve 
Italy  in  war.  The  ambition  of  strangers  was  once  more  to 
desolate  her  plains.  Ferdinand  king  of  Naples  had  reigned 
for  thirty  years  after  the  discomfiture  of  his  competitor  with 
success  and  ability ;  but  with  a  degree  of  ill  faith  as  well  as 
tyranny  towards  his  subjects  that  rendered  his  government 
desei  vedly  odious.  His  son  Alfonso,  whose  succession  seemed 
now  near  at  hand,  was  still  more  marked  by  these  vices  than 
himself.1  Meanwhile,  the  pretensions  of  the  house  of  Anjou 
had  legally  descended,  after  the  death  of  old  Regnier,  to 
Regnier  duke  of  Lorraine,  his  grandson  by  a  daughter ; 
whose  marriage  into  the  house  of  Lorraine  had,  however, 
so  displeased  her  father,  that  he  bequeathed  his  Neapolitan 
title,  along  with  his  real  patrimony,  the  county  of  Provence, 
to  a  count  of  Maine  ;  by  whose  testament  they  became  vested 
in  the  crown  of  France.  Louis  XL,  while  he  took  posses- 
sion of  Provence,  gave  himself  no  trouble  about  Naples. 
But  Charles  VIII.,  inheriting  his  father's  ambition  without 
that  cool  sagacity  which  restrained  it  in  general  from  im- 
practicable attempts,  and  far  better  circumstanced  at  home 
than  Louis  had  ever  been,  was  ripe  for  an  expedition  to 
vindicate  his  pretensions  upon  Naples,  or  even  for  more 
extensive  projects.  It  was  now  two  centuries  since  the 
kings  of  France  had  begun  to  aim,  by  intervals,  at  conquests 
in  Italy.  Philip  the  Fair  and  his  successors  were  anxious 
to  keep  up  a  connection  with  the  Guelf  party,  and  to  be 
considered  its  natural  heads,  as  the  German  emperors  were 
of  the  Ghibelins.  The  long  English  wars  changed  all  views 
of  fie  court  of  France  to  self-defence.  But  in  the  fifteenth 
century  its  plans  of  aggranoVrzement  beyond  the  Alps  began 
to  revive.  Several  times,  as  I  have  mentioned,  the  republic 
of  Genoa  put  itself  under  the  dominion  of  France.  The 
dukes  of  Savoy,  possessing  most  part  of  Piedmont,  and  ma- 
ters of  the  mountain-passes,  were,  by  birth,  intermarriage, 
and  habitual  policy,  completely  dedicated  to  the  French  in- 

1  Comines,  who  speaks  sufficiently  ill  cruel  que  lui,  ne  plus  mauvais,  ne  plus 
of  the  father,  sums  up  the  son's  character  vicieux  et  plus  infect,  ne  plus  gourmand 
rery  concisely     Xul  homme  n'a  este  plus    que  lui.     1.  vii.  c.  13 


Italy.  UPON   NAPLES.  483 

terests.1  In  the  former  wars  of  Ferdinand  against  the  house 
of  Anjou,  Pope  Pins  II.,  a  very  enlightened  statesman,  fore 
saw  the  danger  of  Italy  from  the  prevailing  influence  of 
France,  and  deprecated  the  introduction  of  her  armies.2  But 
at  that  time  the  central  parts  of  Lombardy  were  held  by  a 
man  equally  renowned  as  a  soldier  and  a  politician,  Francesco 
Sforza.  Conscious  that  a  claim  upon  his  own  dominions  sub- 
sisted in  the  house  of  Orleans,  he  maintained  a  strict  alliance 
with  the  Aragonese  dynasty  at  Naples,  as  having  a  common 
interest  against  France.  But  after  his  death  the  connection 
between  Milan  and  Naples  came  to  be  weakened.  In  tho 
new  system  of  alliances  Milan  and  Florence,  sometimes  in- 
cluding Venice,  were  combined  against  Ferdinand  and  Sixtus 
IV.,  an  unprincipled  and  restless  pontiff.  Ludovico  Sforza, 
who  had  usurped  the  guardianship  of  his  nephew  the  duke 
of  Milan,  found,  as  that  young  man  advanced  to  maturity, 
that  one  crime  required  to  be  completed  by  another.  To 
depose  and  murder  his  ward  was,  however,  a  scheme  that 
prudence,  though  not  conscience,  bade  him  hesitate  to  exe- 
cute. He  had  rendered  Ferdinand  of  Naples  and  Piero  de' 
Medici,  Lorenzo's  heir,  his  decided  enemies.  A  revolution 
at  Milan  would  be  the  probable  result  of  his  continuing 
in  usurpation.  In  these  circumstances  Ludovico 
Sforza  excited  the  king  of  France  to  undertake 
the  conquest  of  Naples.3 

So  long  as  the  three  great  nations  of  Europe  were  unable 
to  put  forth  their  natural  strength  through  internal  separation 
or  foreign  war,  the  Italians  had  so  little  to  dread  for  their 
independence,  that  their  policy  was  altogether  directed  to 
regulating  the  domestic  balance  of  power  among  themselves. 

i  Denina,   Storia  dell'  Italia  Occiden-  armis  ejici,  neque  id  Italiae  libertati  co» 

tale,   t.   ii.   passim.     Louis  XI.  treated  ducere ;  Gallos,  si  regnum  obtinuissent 

Savoy  as  a  fief  of  Frauce  ;  interfering  in  Senas  haud  dubie  subacturos;  Florentinos 

all  its  affairs,  and  even  taking  on  himself  adversus   lilia  nihil    acturos  ;    Borsium 

the  regency  after  the  death  of  Philibert  I.,  Mutime  ducem  Gallis  galliorem  videri 

under  pretence  of  preventing  disorders.  Flaminiae  regulos  ad  Francos  inclinare 

p.   185.     The  marquis  of  Saluzzo,  who  Genuam   Francis    subesse,   et  civitatein 

possessed  considerable  territories  in  the  Astensem ;     si    pontifex    Romanus    ali- 

south  of  Piedmont,  had  done  homage  to  quando  Fraucorum  amicus   assumatur, 

France  ever  since  1353  (p.  40),   though  Tiilail  reliqui  in  Italia  remanere  quod  nou 

to  the  injury  of  his  real   superior,   the  transeat  in  Gallorum    nomen  ;    tueri  se 

duke  of  Savoy.    This  gave  France  another  I  tali  am,    dum    Ferdinandum    tueretur. 

pretext  for  interference  in  Italy,     p.  187-  Commentar.     Pii  Secundi,  1.  iv.   p.  96 

2  Cosmo   de"  Medici,   in  a    conference  Spondainus,  who  led  me  to  this  passage, 

with   Pius  II.   at   Florence,  having  ex-  is  very  angry  ;  but  the  year  1494  proved 

pressed  his  surprise  that  the  pope  should  Pius  II.  to  be  a  \var\  statesman, 
support  Ferdinand:    Pontifex  haud   fe-        3  Guicciardini,  1.  i. 
renduin  fuisse  ait,regem  a  se  constitutum. 


484  CLAIMS  ON  NAPLES.   Chap.  III.  P>rt  II 

In  the  latter  part  of  llio  fifteenth  century  a  more  enlarged 
view  of  Europe  would  have  manifested  the  necessity  of 
reconciling  petty  animosities,  and  sacrificing  petty  ambition, 
in  order  to   preserve   the  nationality  of  their  governments; 

not  by  attempting  to  melt  down  Lombards  and  Neapolitans, 
principalities  and  republics,  into  a  single  monarchy,  but  by 
the  more  just  and  rational  scheme  of  a  common  federation. 
The  politicians  of  Italy  were  abundantly  competent,  as  far  a3 
cool  and  clear  understandings  could  render  them,  to  perceive 
the  interests  of  their  country.  But  it  is  the  will  of  Provi- 
dence that  the  highest  and  surest  wisdom,  even  in  matters 
of  policy,  should  never  be  unconnected  with  virtue.  In  re- 
lieving himself  from  an  immediate  danger,  Ludovico  Sforza 
overlooked  the  consideration  that  the  presumptive  heir  of 
tin;  king  of  France  claimed  by  an  ancient  title  that  princi- 
pality of  Milan  which  he  was  compassing  by  usurpation  and 
murder.  But  neither  Milan  nor  Naples  was  free  from  other 
claimants  than  France,  nor  was  she  reserved  to  enjoy  unmo- 
lested the  spoil  of  Italy.  A  louder  and  a  louder  strain  of 
warlike  dissonance  will  be  heard  from  the  banks  of  the 
Danube,  and  from  the  Mediterranean  gulf.  The  dark  and 
wily  Ferdinand,  the  rash  and  lively  Maximilian,  are  pre- 
paring to  hasten  into  the  lists ;  the  schemes  of  ambition  are 
assuming  a  more  comprehensive  aspect ;  and  the  controversy 
of  Neapolitan  succession  is  to  expand  into  the  long  rivalry 
between  the  houses  of  France  and  Austria.  But  here,  while 
Italy  is  still  untouched,  and  before  as  yet  the  first  lances  of 
France  gleam  along  the  defiles  of  the  Alps,  we  close  the 
history  of  the  Middle  Ages. 


fePAiw.  VISIGOTHS   IN   SPAIN.  48.1 


CHAPTER   IV. 

THE    HISTORY    OF    SPAIN    TO    THE  CONQUEST    OP   GRANADA 


Kingdom  of  the  Visigoths —  Conquest  of  Spain  by  the  Moors  —  Gradual  Revival  of 
the  Spanish  Nation  —  Kingdoms  of  Leon,  Aragon,  Navarre,  and  Castile,  succes 
si-vely  formed  —  Chartered  Towns  of  Castile — Military  Orders  —  Conquest  of  Fer- 
dinand III.  and  James  of  Aragon  —  Causes  of  the  Delay  in  expelling  the  Moors  — 
History  of  Castile  continued  —  Character  of  the  Government — Peter  the  Cruel  — 
House  of  Trastamare  —  John  n.  —  Henry  IV.  —  Constitution  of  Castile  —  National 
Assemblies  or  Cortes  — their  constituent  Parts  —  Right  of  Taxation  — Legislation 
—  Privy  Council  of  Castile—  Laws  for  the  Protection  of  Libert)'  —  Imperfections 
of  the  Constitution  —  Aragon — its  History  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  Cen- 
turies—  disputed  Succession  —  Constitution  of  Aragon  —  Free  Spirit  of  its  Aris- 
tocracy—  Privilege  of  Union  —  Powers  of  the  Justiza  —  Legal  Securities  —  Illus- 
trations—  other  Constitutional  Laws — Valencia  and  Catalonia — Onion  of  tw1) 
Crowns  by  the  Marriage  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  —  Conquest  of  Granada. 

The  history  of  Spain  during  the  middle  ages  ought  to 
commence  with  the  dynasty  of  the  Visigoths;  a  Ki ngdomof 
nation  among  the  first  that  assaulted  and  over-  Visigoths  in 
threw  the  Roman  Empire,  and  whose  establish-  pam' 
ment  preceded  by  nearly  half  a  century  the  invasion  of 
Clovis.  Vanquished  by  that  conqueror  in  the  battle  of 
Poitiers,  the  Gothic  monarchs  lost  their,  extensive  dominions 
in  Gaul,  and  transferred  their  residence  from  Toulouse  to 
Toledo.  But  I  will  not  detain  the  reader  by  naming  one  sov- 
ereign of  that  obscure  race.  It  may  suffice  to  mention  that 
the  Visigothic  monarchy  differed  in  several  respects  from  that 
of  the  Franks  during  the  same  period.  The  crown  was  les? 
hereditary,  or  at  least  the  regular  succession  was  more  fre- 
quently disturbed.  The  prelates  had  a  still  more  command- 
ing influence  in  temporal  government.  The  distinction  of 
Romans  and  barbarians  was  less  marked,  the  laws  more  uni- 
form, and  approaching  nearly  to  the  imperial  code.  The 
power  of  the  sovereign  was  perhaps  more  limited  by  an 
aristocratical  council  than  in  France,  but  it  never  yielded 
to  the  dangerous  influence  of  mayors  of  the  palace.  Civil 
wars  and  disputed  successions  were  very  frequent,  but  the 
integrity  of  the  kingdom  was  not  violated  by  the  custom  of 
paitition. 


486  CONQUEST   BY  THE   SARACENS.  Chap.  IV 

Spain,  after  reman  ing  for  nearly  three  centuries  in  the 
Couquest  possession  of  the  Visigoths,  fell  under  the  yoke  of 
by  the  the  Saracens  in  712.     The  fervid  and  irresistible 

enthusiasm  which  distinguished  the  youthful  period 
of  Mohammedism  might  sufficiently  account  for  this  conquest, 
even  if  we  could  not  assign  additional  causes  —  the  factions 
which  divided  the  Goths,  the  resentment  of  disappointed  pre- 
tenders to  the  throne,  the  provocations,  as  has  been  generally 
believed,  of  count  Julian,  and  the  temerity  that  risked  the 
fate  of  an  empire  on  the  chances  of  a  single  battle.1  It  is 
more  surprising  that  a  remnant  of  this  ancient  monarchy 
should  not  only  have  preserved  its  national  liberty  and  name 
in  the  northern  mountains,  but  waged  for  some  centuries  a 
successful,  and  generally  an  offensive  warfare  against  the  con- 
querors, till  the  balance  was  completely  turned  in  its  favor, 
and  the  Moors  were  compelled  to  maintain  almost  as  obstinate 
and  protracted  a  contest  for  a  small  portion  of  the  peninsula. 
But  the  Arabian  monarchs  of  Cordova  found  in  their  success 
and  imagined  security  a  pretext  for  indolence ;  even  in  the 
cultivation  of  science  and  contemplation  of  the  magnificent 
architecture  of  their  mosques  and  palaces  they  forgot  their 
poor  but  daring  enemies  in  the  Asturias ;  while,  according  to 
the  nature  of  despotism,  the  fruits  of  wisdom  or  bravery  in 
one  generation  were  lost  in  the  lollies  and  effeminacy  of  the 
next.  Their  kingdom  was  dismembered  by  successful  rebels, 
who  formed  the  states  of  Toledo,  Huesca,  Saragosa,  and  others 
less  eminent ;  and  these,  in  their  own  mutual  contests,  not 
only  relaxed  their  natural  enmity  towards  the  Christian 
princes,  but  sometimes  sought  their  alliance.2 

The  last  attack  which  seemed  to  endanger  the  reviving 
Kingdom  monarchy  of  Spain  was  that  of  Almanzor,  the 
■rf Leon  j|jn  ;r;ous  vizir  of  Haccham  II.,  towards  the  end 

of  the  tenth  century,  wherein  the  city  of  Leon,  and  even  the 
shrine  of  Compostella,  were  burned  to  the  ground.  For  some 
ages  before  this  transient  reflux,  gradual  encroachments  had 
been  made  upon  the  Saracens,  and  tlaj  kingdom  originally 
styled  of  Oviedo,  the  seat  of  which  was  removed  to  Leon  in 
914,  had  extended  its  boundary  to  the    Douio,  and  even  to 


1  [Note.] 

*  Cardonne,  Histoire  de  TAfrique  et  de  l'Espajsrne. 


Spaih.  LEON,   NAVARRE,  ARAGON.  437 

the  mountainous  chain  of  the  Guadarrama.  The  province  of 
Old  Castile,  thus  denominated,  as  is  generally  supposed,  from 
the  castles  erected  while  it  remained  a  march  or  frontier 
against  the  Moors,  was  governed  by  hereditary  counts,  elected 
originally  by  the  provincial  aristocracy,  and  virtually  inde- 
pendent, it  seems  probable,  of  the  kings  of  Leon,  though 
commonly  serving  them  in  war  as  brethren  of  the  same  faith 
and  nation.1 

While  the  kings  of  Leon  were  thus  occupied  in  recovering 
the  western  provinces,  another  race  of  Christian  Kin  doms 
princes  grew  up  silently  under  the  shadow  of  the  of  Navarre 
Pyrenean  mountains.  Nothing  can  be  more  ob-  an  rason 
scure  than  the  beginnings  of  those  little  states  which  were 
formed  in  Navarre  and  the  country  of  Soprarbe.  They  might 
perhaps  be  almost  contemporaneous  with  the  Moorish  con- 
quests. On  both  sides  of  the  Pyrenees  dwelt  an  aboriginal 
people,  the  last  to  undergo  the  yoke,  and  who  had  never  ac- 
quired the  language,  of  Rome.  We  know  little  of  these 
intrepid  mountaineers  in  the  dark  period  which  elapsed  undei 
the  Gothic  and  Frank  dynasties,  till  we  find  them  cutting  off 
the  rear-guard  of  Charlemagne  in  Roncesvalles,  and  main- 
taining at  least  their  independence,  though  seldom,  like  the 
kings  of  Asturias,  waging  offensive  war  against  the  Saracens. 
The  town  of  Jaca,  situated  among  long  narrow  valleys  that 
intersect  the  southern  ridges  of  the  Pyrenees,  was  the  capital 
of  a  little  free  state,  which  afterwards  expanded  into  the  mon- 
archy of  Aragon.2  A  territory  rather  more  extensive  be- 
longed to  Navarre,  the  kings  of  which  fixed  their  seat  at 
Pampelona.  Biscay  seems  to  have  been  divided  between 
this  kingdom  and  that  of  Leon.  The  connection  of  Aragon 
or  Soprarbe  and  Navarre  was  very  intimate,  and  they  were 
jften  united  under  a  single  chief. 

1  According   to  Itoderic  of  Toledo,  one  at  least  from  the  time  of  Ferdinand  G011- 

of  the  earliest  Spanish  historians,  though  salvo  about  the  middle  of  the  tenth  cen- 

not  older  than  the  beginning  of  the  tbir-  tury.     Ex  quo  iste  suscepit  sine   patriae 

teenth  century,  the  nobles  of  Castile,  in  comitatum.eessaveruntreges  Asturiarum 

the  reign  of  Froila,  about  the  year  924,  insolescere  in   Castellam,   et    a   flumiue 

sibi    et    posteris    provideruut,   et    duos  Pisorica  nihil  amplius  vindicarunt,  1.  v 

milites  non  de  potentioribus.  sed  de  pru-  c.  2.     Marina,  in  his  Ensayo  Historico- 

dentioribus  elegerunt,   quos    et  judices  Critico,  is    disposed  to  controvert    this 

statuerunt,  ut  dissensiones  patriae  et  que-  fact. 

relantium  causae  suo  judicio  sopirentur.         -  The  Fueros,  or  written  laws  of  Jaca. 

I.  v.  c.  1.     Several  other  passages  in  the  were  perhaps  more  ancient  than  any  local 

game  writer  prove   that  the  counts   of  customary  in  Europe.     Alfonso  III.  con- 

Castile  were  nearly  independent  of  Leon,  firms  them  by  name  of  the  ancient  usagw 


488    CAPTURE  OF  TOLEDO  AND  SARAGOSA.    Chap.  IV 

At  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century,  Sancho  the 
Kingdom  of  Great,  king  of  Navarre  and  Aragon,  was  enabled 
Castile.  to  renjer  n[s  second  son  Ferdinand  count,  or,  as 

he  assumed  the  title,  king  of  Castile.  This  effectually  dis- 
membered that  province  from  the  kingdom  of  Leon ;  but 
their  union  soon  became  more  complete  than  ever,  though 
with  a  reversed  supremacy.  Bermudo  III.,  king  of  Leon, 
fell  in  an  engagement  with  the  new  king  of  Castile,  who  had 
married  his  sister ;  and  Ferdinand,  in  her  right,  or  in  that 
of  conquest,  became  master  of  the  united  monarchy.  This 
cessation  of  hostilities  between  the  Christian  states  enabled 
them  to  direct  a  more  unremitting  energy  against  their  ancient 
enemies,  who  were  now  sensibly  weakened  by  the  various 
causes  of  decline  to  which  I  have  already  alluded.  During 
the  eleventh  century  the  Spaniards  were  almost  always  supe- 
rior in  the  field ;  the  towns  which  they  began  by  pillaging, 
they  gradually  possessed ;  their  valor  was  heightened  by  the 
customs  of  chivalry  and  inspired  by  the  example  of  the  Cid ; 
and  before  the  end  of  this  age  Alfonso  VI.  recovered  the 
capture  of  ancient  metropolis  of  the  monarchy,  the  city  of  To- 
Toiedo,  ledo.    This  was  the  severest  blow  which  the  Moors 

had  endured,  and  an  unequivocal  symptom  of  that  change 
in  their  relative  strength,  which,  from  being  so  gradual,  wa? 
the  more  irretrievable.  Calamities  scarcely  inferior  fell  upon 
them  hi  a  different  quarter.  The  kings  of  Aragon  (a  title 
belonging  originally  to  a  little  district  upon  the  river  of  that 
name)  had  been  cooped  up  almost  in  the  mountains  by  the 
small  Moorish  states  north  of  the  Ebro,  especially  that  of 
Huesca.  About  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century  they 
began  to  attack  their  neighbors  with  success ;  the  Moors  lost 
one  town  after  another,  till,  in  1118,  exposed  and  weakened 

of  Jaca.     They  prescribe  the  descent  of  magis  remoti,  invenerint  in   villfi   magis 

lands  and  movables,  as  well  as  the  elec-  proximfi  appellito,  [deest  aliqnid?]  onines 

tion  of  municipal  magistrates.    The  fol-  qui  nondum  fuerint  egressi  tunc  villain 

lowing  law.  which  enjoins  the  vising  in  illani,quae  tardiua  Becuta  est  appellitum, 

arms  on  a  sudden  emergency,  illustrates,  pecent  [solvant]  unam  baccam  [vaccam]; 

with  a  sort  of  romantic  wildness,   the  et  unusquisque  homo  ex  iilis  qui  tardiua 

manners  of  ;i  pastoral  but  warlike  people,  secutus  est  appellitum,  et  quern  magis 

and  reminds  us  of  a  well-known  passage  remoti    praecesserint,  pecet    tres  BOlidos, 

in  the  Lady  of  the  Lake.     De  appellitis  quomodo    nobis    videbitur,    partiendos. 

ita  statuimus.      Cnin  homines  de  villis,  Tamen  in    Jaca  et    in  aliis   villis,   sint 

velqui  stantinmootaniscumsuisgauatds  aliqui  noininati  et  certi,  quos  elegeriut 

[gregibus],  andierint  appellitum  ;  omnes  consules,  qui  remaneant  ad  villas  custo- 

capiant  arma,  et  dimissis  ganatis.  et  ora-  diendas  et   defendendas.     Biancse  (Join- 

inlius  aliis  suia   raziendis   [negotiis]  se-  mentaria,  in  Schotti  Uispania  lllustruta 

quaatur  appellitum.    Etsiilliqui  fnerint  p.  595. 


»pain.  MODE  OF   SETTLING  CONQU.ES  489 

by  the  reduction  of  all  these  places,  the  city  of  Saragosa,  in 
which  a  line  of  Mohammedan  princes  had  flour-  and  s«a- 
ished  for  several  ages,  became  the  prize  of  Al-  s°sa- 
fonso  I.  and  the  capital  of  his  kingdom.  The  southern  parts 
of  what  is  now  the  province  of  Aragon  were  successively 
reduced  during  the  twelfth  century ;  while  all  new  Castile 
and  Estremadura  became  annexed  in  the  same  gradual  man- 
ner to  the  dominion  of  the  descendants  of  Alfonso  VI. 

Although  the  feudal  system  cannot  be  said  to  have  obtained 
in  the  kingdoms  of  Leon  and  Castile,  their  pecu- 
liar situation  gave  the  aristocracy  a  great  deal  of  settling  the 
the  same  power  and  independence  which  resulted  newcon- 
in  France  and  Germany  from  that  institution.  The 
territory  successively  recovered  from  the  Moors,  like  waste 
lands  reclaimed,  could  have  no  proprietor  but  the  conquerors, 
and  the  prospect  of  such  acquisitions  was  a  constant  incite- 
ment to  the  nobility  of  Spain,  especially  to  those  who  had 
settled  themselves  on  the  Castilian  frontier.  In  their  new 
conquests  they  built  towns  and  invited  Christian  settlers,  the 
Saracen  inhabitants  being  commonly  expelled  or  voluntarily 
retreating  to  the  safer  provinces  of  the  south.  Thus  Burgo* 
was  settled  by  a  count  of  Castile  about  880 ;  another  fixed 
his  seat  at  Osma  ;  a  third  at  Sepulveda ;  a  fourth  at  Sala- 
manca. These  cities  were  not  free  from  incessant  peril  of  a 
sudden  attack  till  the  union  of  the  two  kingdoms  under  Fer- 
dinand I.,  and  consequently  the  necessity  of  keeping  in  exer- 
cise a  numerous  and  armed  population,  gave  a  character  of 
personal  freedom  and  privilege  to  the  inferior  classes  which 
they  hardly  possessed  at  so  early  a  period  in  any  other  mon- 
archy. Villeinage  seems  never  to  have  been  established  in 
the  Hispano-Gothic  kingdoms,  Leon  and  Castile ;  though  I 
confess  it  was  far  from  being  unknown  in  that  of  Aragon, 
which  had  formed  its  institutions  on  a  different  pattern. 
Since  nothing  makes  us  forget  the  arbitrary  distinctions  of 
rank  so  much  as  participation  in  any  common  calamity,  every 
man  who  had  escaped  the  great  shipwreck  of  liberty  and  re- 
ligion in  the  mountains  of  Asturias  was  invested  with  a  per- 
sonal dignity,  which  gave  him  value  in  hi-  own  eyes  and 
those  of  his  country.  It  is  probably  this  sentiment  transmit- 
ted to  posterity,  and  gradually  fixing  the  national  character, 
that  has  produced  the  elevation  of  manner  remarked  by  ti-tv- 


490  CHARTERED   TOWNS  Chap.  IV 

ellers  in  the  Castilian  peasant.     But  while  these  acquisition* 

of  the  nobility  promoted  the  grand  object  of  winning  back  the 
peninsula  from  its  invaders,  they  by  no  means  invigorated  the 
government  or  tended  to  domestic  tranquillity. 

A  more  interesting  method  of  securing  the  public  defence 

was  by  the  institution  of  chartered  towns  or  com- 
towns  or  munities.  These  were  established  at  an  earlier 
ti°eTmuni"       Peri°d  than  in   France  and  England,  and  were,  in 

some  degree,  of  a  peculiar  description.  Instead 
of  purchasing  their  immunities,  and  almost  their  personal 
freedom,  at  the  hands  of  a  master,  the  burgesses  of  Castil- 
ian towns  were  invested  with  civil  rights  and  extensive  prop- 
erty on  the  more  liberal  condition  of  protecting  their  country. 
The  earliest  instance  of  the  erection  of  a  community  is  in 
1020,  when  Alfonso  V.  in  the  cortes  at  Leon  established  the 
privileges  of  that  city  with  a  regular  code  of  laws,  by  which 
its  magistrate*  should  be  governed.  The  citizens  of  Carrion, 
Llanes,  and  other  towns  were  incorporated  by  the  same 
prince.  Sanchothe  Great  gave  a  similar  constitution  to  Nax- 
ara.  Sepulveda  had  its  code  of  laws  in  1076  from  Alfonso 
VI. ;  in  the  same  reign  Logrono  and  Sahagun  acquired  their 
privileges,  and  Salamanca  not  long  afterwards.  The  fuero, 
or  original  charter  of  a  Spanish  community,  was  properly  a 
compact,  by  which  the  king  or  lord  granted  a  town  and  adja- 
cent district  to  the  burgesses,  with  various  privileges,  and  es- 
pecially that  of  choosing  magistrates  and  a  common  council, 
who  were  bound  to  conform  themselves  to  the  laws  prescribed 
by  the  founder.  These  laws,  civil  as  well  as  criminal,  though 
essentially  derived  from  the  ancient  code  of  the  Visigoths, 
which  continued  to  be  the  common  law  of  Castile  till  the  four- 
teenth or  fifteenth  century,  varied  from  each  other  in  particu- 
lar usages,  which  had  probably  grown  up  and  been  established 
in  these  districts  before  their  legal  confirmation.  The  terri- 
tory held  by  chartered  towns  was  frequently  very  extensive, 
far  beyond  any  comparison  with  corporations  in  our  own 
country  or  in  France  ;  including  the  estates  of  private  land- 
holders, subject  to  the  jurisdiction  and  control  of  the  munici- 
pality as  well  as  its  inalienable  demesnes,  allotted  to  the 
maintenance  oi  the  magistrates  and  other  public  expenses. 
In  every  town  the  king  appointed  a  governor  to  receive  the 
usual    tributes  and    watch   over  the   police  and    the   fortified 


Si-ain.  OR  COMMUNITIES.  491 

places  within  the  district ;  but  the  administration  of  justice 
was  exclusively  reserved  to  the  inhabitants  and  their  elected 
judges.  Even  the  executive  power  of  the  royal  officer  was 
regarded  with  jealousy  ;  he  was  forbidden  to  use  violence  tow- 
ards any  one  without  legal  process  ;  and,  by  the  fuero  of 
Logrono,  if  he  attempted  to  enter  forcibly  into  a  private 
house  he  might  be  killed  with  impunity.  These  democrati- 
cal  customs  were  altered  in  the  fourteenth  century  by  Al- 
fonso XL,  who  vested  the  municipal  administration  in  a  small 
number  of  jurats,  or  regidors.  A  pretext  for  this  was  found 
in  some  disorders  to  which  popular  elections  had  led  ;  but  the 
real  motive,  of  course,  must  have  been  to  secure  a  greater 
influence  for  the  crown,  as  in  similar  innovations  of  some 
English  kings. 

In  recompense  for  such  liberal  concessions  the  incorporated 
towns  were  bound  to  certain  money  payments,  and  to  military 
service.  This  was  absolutely  due  from  every  inhabitant, 
without  dispensation  or  substitution,  unless  in  case  of  infirm- 
ity. The  royal  governor  and  the  magistrates,  as  in  the  sim- 
ple times  of  primitive  Rome,  raised  and  commanded  the 
niilitia  ;  who,  in  a  service  always  short,  and  for  the  most  part 
necessary,  preserved  that  delightful  consciousness  of  freedom, 
under  the  standard  of  their  fellow  citizens  and  chosen  leaders, 
which  no  mere  soldier  can  enjoy.  Every  man  of  a  certain 
property  was  bound  to  serve  on  horseback,  and  was  exempt- 
ed in  return  from  the  payment  of  taxes.  This  produced  a 
distinction  between  the  cahalleros,  or  noble  class,  and  the 
pecheros,  or  payers  of  tribute.  But  the  distinction  appears 
to  have  been  founded  only  upon  wealth,  as  in  the  Roman 
equites,  and  not  upon  hereditary  rank,  though  it  most  likely 
prepared  the  way  for  the  latter.  The  horses  of  these  cabal- 
leros  could  not  be  seized  for  debt ;  in  some  cases  they  were 
exclusively  eligible  to  magistracy ;  and  their  honor  was  pro- 
tected by  laws  which  rendered  it  highly  penal  to  insult  or 
molest  them.  But  the  civil  rights  of  rich  and  poor  in  courts 
of  justice  were  as  equal  as  in  England.1 

l  I  am  indebted  for  this  account  of  Marina,  a  canon  of  the  church   of  St 

municipal  towns  in   Castile   to  a  book  Tsidor,  entitled,  Ensayo  Historico-Critico 

published  at  Madrid  in  1808,  immedi-  sobre  la  antigua  legislaciou  y  principals 

ately  after  the  revolution,  by  the  Doctor  cuerpos  legales  de  los  reynos  de  Lyon  j 


492  MILITARY   ORDERS  Chat    [V. 

The  progress  of  the  Christian  arms  in  Spain  may  in  part 
Military  he  ascribed  to  another  remarkable  feature  in  the 
orders.  constitution   of   that   country,  the  military  orders. 

These  had  already  been  tried  with  signal  effect  in  Palestine  ; 
ami  the  similar  circumstances  of  Spain  easily  led  to  an  adop- 
tion of  the  same  policy.  In  a  very  few  years  after  the  first 
institution  of  the  Knights  Templars,  they  were  endowed  with 
great  estates,  or  rather  districts,  won  from  the  Moors,  on  con- 
dition of  defending  their  own  and  the  national  territory. 
These  lay  chiefly  in  the  parts  of  Aragon  beyond  the  Ebro, 
the  conquest  of  which  was  then  recent  and  insecure.1  So 
extraordinary  was  the  respect  for  this  order  and  that  of  St. 
John,  and  so  powerful  the  conviction  that  the  hope  of  Chris- 
tendom rested  upon  their  valor,  that  Alfonso  the  First,  king 
of  Aragon,  dying  childless,  bequeathed  to  them  his  whole 
kingdom  ;  an  example  of  liberality,  says  Mariana,  to  surprise 
future  times  and  displease  his  own.'2  The  states  of  Aragon 
annulled,  as  may  be  supposed,  this  strange  testament;  but 
the  successor  of  Alfonso  was  obliged  to  pacify  the  ambitious 
knights  by  immense  concessions  of  money  and  territory ;  stip- 
ulating even  not  to  make  peace  with  the  Moors  against  their 
will.3  In  imitation  of  these  great  military  orders  common  to 
all  Christendom,  there  arose  three  Spanish  institutions  of  a 
similar  kind,  the  orders  of  Calatrava,  Santiago,  and  Alcan- 
tara. The  first  of  these  was  established  in  1158  ;  the  second 
and  most  famous  had  its  charter  from  the  pope  in  117o, 
though  it  seems  to  have  existed  previously  ;  the  third  branch- 
ed off  from  that  of  Calatrava  at  a  subsequent  time.4  These 
were  military  colleges,  having  their  walled  towns  in  different 
parts  of  Castile,  and  governed  by  an  elective  grand  master, 
whose  influence  in  the  state  was  at  least  equal  to  that  of  any 
of  the  nobility.  In  the  civil  dissensions  of  the  fourteenth 
and  fifteenth  centuries,  the  chiefs  of  these  incorporated 
knights  were  often  very  prominent. 

Final  union         The  kingdoms   of  Leon   and   Castile  were   un- 

of  Leon  and    wisely  divided  anew  by  Alfonso  VII.  between  his 

sons  Sancho  and  Ferdinand,  and  this  produced  noi 

Uastilla,   especialmente  sobre   el    codigo    burgh  Review,  No.  XLTIT.,  will  convej 
de  D.  Alonso  el  Sabio,  conocido    con   el    a  sufficient  notion  of  its  contents, 
nombre  de  las  Siete  Partidas.     This  work        '  Mariana,  Hist.  Hispan.  1.  x.  c.  10 
is  perhaps  not  readily  to  be  procured  in         !  1.  x.  c.  15. 
England  :   but  an  article   in   the   Edin-        3  1.  x.  c.  18. 

*1.  xi  c  6,  13;  1.  xii.  c.  8 


Spain.  EXPULSION   OF   THE  MOORS.  493 

only  a  separation  but  a  revival  of  the  ancient  jealousy  with 
frequent  wars  for  near  a  century.     At  length,  in  1238,  Fer- 
dinand III.,  king  of  Castile,  reunited  forever  the  two  branches 
of  the  Gothic  monarchy.     He  employed  their  joint  strength 
against  the  Moors,  whose  dominion,  though  it  still  embraced 
the  finest  provinces  of  the  peninsula,  was  sinking  by  internal 
weakness,  and  had  never  recovered  a  tremendous  defeat  at 
Banos    di    Toloso,   a    few   miles  from  Baylen,   in  conquest  of 
1210.1     Ferdinand,  bursting  into  Andalusia,  took  Andalusia, 
its  great  capital  the  city  of  Cordova,  not  less  en- 
nobled by  the   cultivation   of  Arabian   science,   and  by   the 
names   of   Avicenna  and    Averroes,    than    by   the    splendid 
works  of  a  rich  and   munificent  dynasty.2     In   a  few  years 
more  Seville  was  added  to  his  conquests,  and  the  Moors  lost 
their  favorite  regions  on   the  banks  of  the  Guad- and  Vaien 
alquivir.      James   I.   of    Aragon,   the  victories   of  cia" 
whose    long    reign  gave    him    the    surname    of    Conqueror, 
reduced  the  city  and  kingdom  of  Valencia,  the  Balearic  isles, 
and  the  kingdom  of  Murcia ;  but  the  last  was  annexed,  ac 
cording  to  compact,  to  the  crown  of  Castile. 

It  could  hardly  have  been  expected  about  the  middle  ol 
the  thirteenth  century,  when  the  splendid  conquests  „ 
of  Ferdinand  and  James  had  planted  the   Chris- of  the 
tian  banner  on  the  three  principal  Moorish  cities,  ^If-^01^ 
that  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  were  yet  to  elapse 
before  the  rescue  of  Spain  from  their  yoke  should  be  com- 
pleted.    Ambition,  religious  zeal,  national  enmity,  could  not 
be  supposed  to  pause  in  a  career  which  now  seemed  to  be  ob- 
structed by  such  moderate   difficulties  ;  yet  we  find,  on  the 
contrary,  the  exertions  of  the  Spaniards  begin  from  this  time 
to  relax,  and  their  acquisitions  of  territory  to  become  more 

i  A  letter  of  Alfonso  IX.,  who  gained  however,  must  be  greatly  exaggerated,  as 

this  victory,  to  Pope  Innocent  III.,  puts  numerical  statements  generally  are.    'She 

the  loss  of  the  Moors  at  180,000  men.  mines  of  gold  and  silver  were  ven  pro- 

The  Arabian  historians,  though  without  ductive.    And  the  revenues  of  the  khalifs 

specifying  numbers,  seem  to  confirm  this  of  Cordova  are  said  to  have  amounted  to 

immense   slaughter,  which   nevertheless  130,000,000  of   French    money ;    besides 

it  is  difficult  to  conceive  before  the  in-  large  contributions  that,  according  to  the 

vention  of  gunpowder,  or  indeed  since,  practice   of  oriental  governments,   were 

Cardonne,  t.  ii.  p.  327.  paid  in  the  fruits  of  the  earth.     Other 

2  If  we  could  rely  on  a  Moorish  author  proofs  of  the  extraordinary  opulence  and 

quoted  by   Cardonne  (t.    i.    p.   337),   the  splendor  of  this  monarchy  are  dispersed 

city  of  Cordova  contained,  I  know  not  in  Cardonne's   work,   from   which   they 

exactly  in  what  century,  200,000  houses,  have    been    chiefly    borrowed    by    later 

300    mosques,    and    900    public    baths!  writers.      The    splendid    engravings    in 

There  were  12,000  towns  and  villages  on  Murphy's  Moorish  Antiquities  of  Spaiu 

ihv   banks  of   the   Guadalquivir.     This,  illustrate  this  subject. 


494  EXPULSION   OF   THE  MOORS  Chap.  IV 

slow.  One  of  the  causes,  undoubtedly,  that  produced  this 
unexpected  protraction  of  the  contest  was  (he  superior  means 
of  resistance  which  the  Moors  found  in  retreating.  Their 
population,  spread  originally  over  the  whole  of  Spain,  was 
now  condensed,  and,  if  1  may  so  say,  become  no  further 
compressible,  in  a  single  province.  It  had  been  mingled,  in 
the  northern  and  central  parts,  with  the  Mozarabic  Chris- 
tians, their  subjects  and  tributaries,  not  perhaps  treated  with 
much  injustice,  yet  naturally  and  irremediably  their  enemies. 
Toledo  and  Saragosa,  when  they  fell  under  a  Christian  sov- 
ereign, were  full  of.  these  inferior  Christians,  whose  long  in- 
tercourse with  their  masters  has  infused  the  tones  and  dialect 
of  Arabia  into  the  language  of  Castile.1  But  in  the  twelfth 
century  the  Moors,  exasperated  by  defeat  and  jealous  of  se- 
cret disaffection,  began  to  persecute  their  Christian  subjects, 
till  they  renounced  or  fled  for  their  religion  ;  so  that  in  the 
southern  provinces  scarcely  any  professors  of  Christianity 
were  left  at  the  time  of  Ferdinand's  invasion.  An  equally 
severe  policy  was  adopted  on  the  other  side.  The  Moors  had 
been  permitted  to  dwell  in  Saragosa  as  the  Christians  had 
dwelt  before,  subjects,  not  slaves ;  but  on  the  capture  of  Se- 
ville they  were  entirely  expelled,  and  new  settlers  invited 
from  every  part  of  Spain.  The  strong  fortified  towns  of  An- 
dalusia, such  as  Gibraltar,  Algeciras,  Tariffa,  maintained  also 
a  more  formidable  resistance  than  had  been  experienced  in 
Castile ;  they  cost  tedious  sieges,  were  sometimes  recovered 
by  the  enemy,  and  were  always  liable  to  his  attacks.  But 
the  great  protection  of  the  Spanish  Mohammedans  was  found 
in  the  alliance  and  ready  aid  of  their  kindred  beyond  the 
Straits.  Accustomed  to  hear  of  the  African  Moors  only  as 
pirates,  we  cannot  easily  conceive  the  powerful  dynasties,  the 
warlike  chiefs,  the  vast  armies,  which  for  seven  or  eight  cen- 
turies illustrate  the  annals  of  that  people.  Their  assistance 
was  always  afforded  to  the  true  believers  in  Spain,  though 
their  ambition  was  generally  dreaded  by  those  who  stood  in 
need  of  their  valor.2 

Probably,  however,  the  kings  of  Granada  were  most  in- 
debted to  the  indolence  which  gradually  became  characteristic 
of  their  enemies.  By  the  cession  of  Murcia  to  Castile,  the 
kingdom  of  Aragon  shut  itself  out  from   the  possibility   of 

i  Mariana  1.  xi  c.  1 :  Gibbon,  c.  51.         -  Oardonne,  t.  ii.  and  tii.  passim 


Sfaib  ALFONSO   X.  40.3 

extending  those  conquests  which  had  ennobled  her  earlier 
sovereigns ;  and  their  successors,  not  less  ambitious  and  en- 
terprising, diverted  their  attention  towards  objects  beyond  the 
peninsula.  The  Castiiian,  patient  and  undesponding  in  bad 
success,  loses  his  energy  as  the  pressure  becomes  Less  heavy, 
and  puts  no  ordinary  evil  in  comparison  with  the  exertions 
by  which  it  must  be  removed.  The  greater  part  of  his  coun- 
try freed  by  his  arms,  he  was  content  to  leave  the  enemy  in  y 
single  province  rather  than  undergo  the  labor  of  making  his 
triumph  complete. 

If  a  similar  spirit  of  insubordination  had  not  been  found 
compatible  in  earlier  ages  with  the  aggrandizement  of  the 
Castiiian  monarchy,  we  might  ascribe  its  want  of  Alfonso  x. 
splendid  successes  against  the  Moors  to  the  con-  A-D- 12°2- 
tinned  rebellions  which  disturbed  that  government  for  more 
than  a  century  after  the  death  of  Ferdinand  III.  His  son, 
Alfonso  X.,  might  justly  acquire  the  surname  of  Wise  for  his 
general  proficiency  in  learning,  and  especially  in  astronomi- 
cal science,  if  these  attainments  deserve  praise  in  a  king  who 
was  incapable  of  preserving  his  subjects  in  their  duty.  As  a 
legislator,  Alfonso,  by  his  code  of  the  Siete  Partidas,  sacri- 
ficed the  ecclesiastical  rights  of  his  crown  to  the  usurpation 
of  Rome  ; 1  and  his  philosophy  sunk  below  the  level  of  ordi- 
nary prudence  when  he  permitted  the  phantom  of  an  impe- 
rial crown  in  Germany  to  seduce  his  hopes  for  almost  twenty 
years.  For  the  sake  of  such  an  illusion  he  would  even  have 
withdrawn  himself  from  Castile,  if  the  states  had  not  remon- 
strated against  an  expedition  that  would  probably  have  cost 
him  the  kingdom.  In  the  latter  years  of  his  turbulent  reign 
Alfonso  had  to  contend  against  his  son.  The  right  of  repre- 
sentation was  hitherto  unknown  in  Castile,  which  had  bor- 
rowed little  from  the  customs  of  feudal  nations.  By  the 
received  law  of  succession  the  nearer  was  always  preferred 
to  the  more  remote,  the  son  to  the  grandson.  Alfonso  X. 
had  established  the  different  maxim  of  representation  by  his 
code  of  the  Siete  Partidas,  the  authority  of  which,  however, 
was  not  universally  acknowledged.  The  question  soon  cama 
to  an  issue  :  on  the  death  of  his  elder  son  Ferdinand,  leaving 
two  male  children,  Sancho  their  uncle  asserted  his  claim, 
founded  upon  the  ancient  Castiiian  right  of  succession ;  an^ 

1  Marina.  Ensayo  Historico-Critico,  p.  272,  &c 


496  CIVIL   DISTURBANCES   OF   CASTILE.        Chap.  IV 

this,  chiefly  no  doubt  through  Pear  of  arras,  though  it  did  not 
want  plausible  arguments,  was  ratified  by  an  assembly  of 
the  cortes,  and  secured,  notwithstanding  t lie  king's  reluctance, 
by  the  courage  of  Sancho.  But  the  descendants  of  Ferdi- 
nand, generally  called  the  infant-;  of  la  Cerda,  by  the  protec- 
tion of  France,  to  whose  royal  family  they  were  closely 
allied,  and  of  Aragon,  always  prompt  to  interfere  in  the  dis- 
putes of  a  rival  people,  continued  to  assert  their  pretensions 
for  more  than  half  a  century,  and,  though  they  were  not  very 
successful,  did  not  fail  to  aggravate  the  troubles  of  their 
country. 

The  annals  of  Sancho  IV.  and  his  two  immediate  succes- 
sors, Ferdinand  IV.  and  Alfonso  XI.,  present  a 
tuibauces  series  of  unhappy  and  dishonorable  civil  dissen- 
Sauch^iv  'S10ns  with  too  much  rapidity  to  be  remembered 
ad.  1284.  or  even  understood.  Although  the  Castilian  no- 
ferdinand  bjifty  ]ia(i  no  pretence  to  the  original  independence 
a. d.  1295.  of  the  French  peers,  or  to  the  liberties  of  feudal 
ad.  1312.  tenure,  they  assumed  the  same  privilege  of  rebel- 
ling upon  any  provocation  from  their  sovereign. 
When  such  occurred,  they  seem  to  have  been  permitted,  by 
legal  custom,  to  renounce  their  allegiance  bv  a  solemn  instru- 
ment,  which  exempted  them  from  the  penalties  of  treason.1 
A  very  few  families  composed  an  oligarchy,  the  worst  and 
most  ruinous  condition  of  political  society,  alternately  the 
favorites  and  ministers  of  the  prince,  or  in  arms  against  him. 
If  unable  to  protect  themselves  in  their  walled  towns,  and  by 
the  aid  of  their  faction,  these  Christian  patriots  retired  to 
Aragon'  or  Granada,  and  excited  an  hostile  power  against 
their  country,  and  perhaps  their  religion.  Nothing  is  more 
common  in  the  Castilian  history  than  instances  of  such  de- 
fection. Mariana  remarks  coolly  of  the  family  of  Castro, 
that  they  were  much  in  the  habit  of  revolting  to  the  Moors.'2 
This  house  and  that  of  Lara  were  at  one  time  the  great 
rivals  for  power;  but  from  the  time  of  Alfonso  X.  the  former 
seems  to  have  declined,  and  the  sole  family  that  came  in 
competition  with  the  Laras  during  the  tempestuous  period 
that  followed  was  that  of  Haro,  which  possessed  the  lord-hip 
of  Biscay  by  an  hereditary  title.     The  evils  of  a  weak  gov- 

1  Mariana,  1.  xiii.  c.  11.  tria  gens  per  hrec   tempora  ad   Mauros 

2  Alvarus    Oastrius    patria    aliquanto    BSBpe  defecisse  visa  est.    1.  xii.  c.  12.     Seo 
an  tea.  uti  moris  erat,  renunciata.  —  Cas-    also  chapters  17  and  19. 


Spain.  PETER  THE  CRUEL.  497 

eminent  were  aggravated  by  the  unfortunate  chcumstances 
in  which  Ferdinand  IV.  and  Alfonso  XL  ascended  the 
throne ;  both  minors,  with  a  disputed  regency,  and  the  in- 
terval too  short  to  give  ambitious  spirits  leisure  to  subside 
There  is  indeed  some  apology  for  the  conduct  of  the  Larae 
and  Haros  in  the  character  of  their  sovereigns,  who  had  but 
one  favorite  method  of  avenging  a  dissembled  injury,  or 
anticipating  a  suspected  treason.  Sancho  IV.  assassinates 
Doh  Lope  Haro  in  his  palace  at  Valladolid.  Alfonso  XI. 
invites  to  court  the  infant  Don  Juan,  his  first-cousin,  and 
commits  a  similar  violence.  Such  crimes  may  be  found  in 
the  history  of  other  countries,  but  they  were  nowhere  so 
usual  as  in  Spain,  which  was  far  behind  France,  England, 
and  even  Germany,  in  civilization. 

But  whatever  violence  and  arbitrary  spirit  might  be  im- 
puted to  Sancho  and  Alfonso  was  forgotten  in  the  Peter  th 
unexampled  tyranny  of  Peter  the  Cruel.     A  sus-  Cruel, 
picion  is  frequently  intimated  by  Mariana,  which  AD" 
seems,  in  more  modern  times,  to  have  gained  some  credit,  that 
party  malevolence  has  at  least  grossly  exaggerated  the  enor- 
mities of  this   prince.1     It   is   difficult,  however,  to  believe 
that  a  number  of  atrocious  acts  unconnected  with  each  other, 
and  generally  notorious  enough  in  their  circumstances,  have 
been   ascribed  to   any   innocent   man.     The   history   of  his 
reign,   chiefly   derived,  it  is   admitted,  from   the   pen  of  an 
inveterate  enemy,   Lope  de   Ayala,  charges  him  with   the 
murder  of  his  wife,  Blanche  of  Bourbon,  most  of  his  broth- 
ers and  sisters,  with  Eleanor  Gusman,  their  mother,  many 
Castilian  nobles,  and  multitudes  of  the  commonalty ;  besides 
continual  outrages   of  licentiousness,  and  especially  a  pre- 
tended marriage  with  a  noble  lady  of  the   Castrian  family 
At  length  a  rebellion  was  headed  by  his  illegitimate  brother, 

i  There  is  iu  general  room  enough  for  day,  within  the  recollection  of  many  per- 

scepticism  as  to  the  characters  of  men  sous  living  when  he  wrote?    There  may 

who  are  only  known  to  us  through  their  he    a    question    whether    Richard    III. 

enemies.     History  is  full   of  calumnies,  smothered  his   nephews  in   the  Tower; 

and   of   calumnies    that    Tan    never  be  but  nobody  can  dispute  that  Henry  VIII. 

effaced.     But  I  really  see.no  ground  for  cut  off  Anna  Boleyn's  head, 

thinking  charitably  of  Peter  the  Cruel.  The  passage  from  Matteo  Villani  above 

Froissart,  part  i.  c.  230,  and  Matteo  Vil-  mentioned  is  as  follows  : — Comincio  aspra- 

lani    (in    Script,    lterum    Italic,    t.   xiv.  inente  a  se  far  ubbidire,  perche  temende 

p   53).  the  latter  of  whom  died  before  the  de'  suoi  baroni,  trovo  modo  di  far  infauiare 

rebellion  of  Henry  of  Trastamare,  speak  1'  uno  1'  altro,  e  pretdendo  cagione,  gli 

of  him  much  in  the  same  terms  as  the  comincio  ad  uccidere  con  le  sue  mani.    H 

Spanish    historians.      And    why   should  in  brieve  tempo  ne  fece  morire  26  e  tr* 

Ayala  be  doubted,  when  he  gives  a  long  suoi  fratelli  fece  morire.  &c. 
is t  of  murders  committed  in  the  face  of 


VOL.  I.  — M. 


32 


498  HOUSE  OF  TRASTAMARE.  Chap.  IV 

Henry  count  of  Trastamare,  with  the  assistance  of  Aragon 
and  Portugal.  This,  however,  would  probably  have  failed 
of  dethroning  Peter,  a  resolute  prince,  and  certainly  not 
destitute  of  many  faithful  supporters,  if  Henry  had  not  in- 
voked the  more  powerful  succor  of  Bertrand  du  Guesclin. 
and  the  companies  of  adventure,  who,  after  the  pacification 
between  France  and  England,  had  lost  the  occupation  of 
war,  and  retained  only  that  of  plunder.  With  mercenaries 
so  disciplined  it  was  in  vain  for  Peter  to  contend  ;  but, 
abandoning  Spain  for  a  moment,  he  had  recourse  to  a  more 
powerful  weapon  from  the  same  armory.  Edward  the  Black 
Prince,  then  resident  at  B.ordeaux,  was  induced  by  the  prom- 
ise of  Biscay  to  enter  Spain  as  the  ally  of  Castile ;  and  at 
a.d.  1367.  the  great  battle  of  Navarette  he  continued  lord  of 
the  ascendant  over  those  who  had  so  often  already 
been  foiled  by  his  prowess.  Du  Guesclin  was  made  prisoner ; 
Henry  fled  to  Aragon,  and  Peter  remounted  the  throne. 
But  a  second  revolution  was  at  hand:  the  Black  Prince, 
whom  he  had  ungratefully  offended,  withdrew  into  Guienne ; 
and  he  lostThis  kingdom  and  life  in  a  second  short  contest 
with  his  brother. 

A  more  fortunate  period  began  with  the  accession  of 
House  of  Henry.  His  own  reign  was  hardly  disturbed  by 
Trastamare  any  rebellion ;  and  though  his  successors,  John  I. 
A.Dnri368!       an(l  Henry  III.,  were  not  altogether  so  unmolested, 

John1o-n  especially  the  latter,  who  ascended  the  throne  in 
A.D.  13<9.  .*       .     J .  '  .  0         . 

Henry  in.  his  minority,  yet  the  troubles  of  their  time  Avere 
a.d.  1390.  slight  in  comparison  with  those  formerly  excited 
by  the  houses  of  Lara  and  Haro,  both  of  which  were  now 
happily  extinct.  Though  Henry  II.'s  illegitimacy  left  him 
no  title  but  popular  choice,  his  queen  was  sole  representative 
of  the  Cerdas,  the  offspring,  as  has  been  mentioned  above, 
of  Sancho  IV.'s  elder  brother,  and,  by  the  extinction  of  the 
younger  branch,  unquestioned  heiress  of  the  royal  line. 
Some  years  afterwards,  by  the  marriage  of  Henry  III.  with 
Catherine,  daughter  of  John  of  Gaunt  and  Constance,  an 
illegitimate  child  of  Peter  the  Cruel,  her  pretensions,  such 
as  they  wrere,  became  merged  in  the  crown. 

No  kingdom  could  be  worse  prepared  to  meet  the  disorders 
Johnn.  of  a  minority  than  Castile,  and  in  none  did  the 
a.d.  1406.  circumstances  so  frequently  recur.  John  II.  was 
but  fourteen  months  old  at  his  accession ;  and  but  for   the 


Spain  ALVARO   DE  LUNA.  499 

disinterestedness  of  his  uncle  Ferdinand,  the  nobility  would 
have  been  inclined  to  avert  the  danger  by  placing  that  prince 
upon  the  throne.  In  this  instance,  however,  Castile  suffered 
less  from  faction  during  the  infancy  of  her  sovereign  than  in 
his  maturity.  The  queen  dowager,  at  first  jointly  with  Fer- 
dinand, and  solely  after  his  accession  to  the  crown  of  Aragon, 
administered  the  government  with  credit.  Fifty  years  had 
elapsed  at  her  death  in  1418  since  the  elevation  of  the  house 
of  Trastamare,  who  had  entitled  themselves  to  public  affec- 
tion by  conforming  themselves  more  strictly  than  their  pred- 
ecessors to  the  constitutional  laws  of  Castile,  which  were 
never  so  well  established  as  during  this  period.  In  external 
affairs  their  reigns  were  not  what  is  considered  as  glorious. 
They  were  generally  at  peace  with  Aragon  and 
Granada ;  but  one  memorable  defeat  by  the  Portu-  AD" 1885' 
guese  at  Aljubarrota  disgraces  the  annals  of  John  I.,  whose 
cause  was  as  unjust  as  his  arms  were  unsuccessful.  This 
comparatively  golden  period  ceases  at  the  majority  of  John 
II.  His  reign  was  filled  up  by  a  series  of  conspiracies  and 
civil  wars,  headed  by  his  cousins  John  and  Henry,  the  infants 
of  Aragon,  who  enjoyed  very  extensive  territories  in  Castile, 
by  the  testament  of  their  father  Ferdinand.  Their  brother 
the  king  of  Aragon  frequently  lent  the  assistance  of  his  arms. 
John  himself,  the  elder  of  these  two  princes,  by  marriage 
with  the  heiress  of  the  kingdom  of  Navarre,  stood  in  a  double 
relation  to  Castile,  as  a  neighboring  sovereign,  and  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  native  oligarchy.  These  conspiracies 
were  all  ostensibly  directed  against  the  favorite  of  tauWof  li-d 
John  II.,  Alvaro  de  Luna,  who  retained  for  five-  JJJJ^ 
and-thirty  years  an  absolute  control  over  his  fee- 
ble master.  The  adverse  faction  naturally  ascribed  to  this 
powerful  minister  every  criminal  intention  and  all  public 
mischiefs.  He  was  certainly  not  more  scrupulous  than  the 
generality  of  statesmen,  and  appears  to  have  been  rapacious 
in  accumulating  wealth.  But  there  was  an  energy  and 
courage  about  Alvaro  de  Luna  which  distinguishes  him  from 
the  cowardly  sycophants  who  usually  rise  by  the  favor  of 
weak  princes;  and  Castile  probably  would  not  have  been 
happier  under  the  administration  of  his  enemies.  His  fete 
is  among  the  memorable  lessons  of  history.  After  a  life  of 
troubles  endured  for  the  sake  of  this  favorite,  sometimes  a 
fugitive,   sometimes  a  prisoner,  his  son  heading  rebellion!! 


500  EENRY   IV.  Chap.  IV 

against  bini,  John  II.  suddenly  yielded  to  an  intrigue  of  the 
palace,  and  adopted  sentiments  of  dislike  towards  the  man  he 
had  so  long  loved.  No  substantial  charge  appears  to  have 
been  brought  against  Alvaro  de  Luna,  except  that  general 
malversation  which  it  was  too  late  for  the  king  to  object  to 
him.  The  real  cause  of  John's  change  of  affection  was, 
most  probably,  the  insupportable  restraint  which  the  weak 
are  apt  to  find  in  that  spell  of  a  commanding  understand- 
ing which  they  dare  not  break;  the  torment  of  living  subject 
to  the  ascendant  of  an  inferior,  which  has  produced  so  many 
examples  of  fickleness  in  sovereigns.  That  of  John  II.  is 
not  the  least  conspicuous.  Alvaro  de  Luna  was  brought  to 
a  summary  trial  and  beheaded ;  his  estates  were  confiscated. 
He  met  his  death  with  the  intrepidity  of  Strafford,  to  whom 
he  seems  to  have  borne  some  resemblance  in  character. 
John  II.  did  not  long  survive  his  minister,  dying  in  1454, 
after  a  reign  that  may  be  considered  as  inglorious, 
compared  with  any  except  that  of  his  successor. 
If  the  father  was  not  respected,  the  son  fell  completely  into 
contempt.  He  had  been  governed  by  Pacheco,  marquis  of 
Villena,  as  implicitly  as  John  by  Alvaro  de  Luna.  This 
influence  lasted  for  some  time  afterwards.  But  the  king  in- 
clining to  transfer  his  confidence  to  the  queen  Joanna  of 
Portugal,  and  to  one  Bertrand  de  Cueva,  upon  whom  com- 
mon fame  had  fixed  as  her  paramour,  a  powerful  confederacy 
of  disaffected  nobles  was  formed  against  the  royal  authority. 
In  what  degree  Henry  I  V.'s  government  had  been  improvi- 
dent or  oppressive  towards  the  people,  it  is  hard  to  deter- 
mine. The  chiefs  of  that  rebellion,  Carillo  archbishop  of 
Toledo,  the  admiral  of  Castile,  a  veteran  leader  of  faction, 
and  the  marquis  of  Villena.  so  lately  the  king's  favorite,  were 
undoubtedly  actuated  only  by  selfish  ambition  and  revenge 
They  deposed  Henry  in  an  assembly  of  their  fac- 
tion at  Avila  with  a  sort  of  theatrical  pageantry 
which  has  often  been  described.  But  modern  historians, 
struck  by  the  appearance  of  judicial  solemnity  in  this  pro- 
ceeding, are  sometimes  apt  to  speak  of  it  as  a  national  act; 
while,  on  the  contrary,  it  seems  to  have  been  reprobated  by 
the  majority  of  the  Castilians  as  an  audacious  outrage  upon 
a  sovereign  who,  with  many  defects,  had  not  been  guilty  of 
any  excessive  tyranny.  The  confederates  set  up  Alfonso, 
the  king's  brother,  and  a  civil  war  of  some  duration  ensued. 


Spain.  HENRY    rV.  501 

in  which  they  had  the  support  of  Aragon.  The  queen  of 
Castile  had  at  this  time  borne  a  daughter,  whom  the  enemies 
of  Henry  IV.,  and  indeed  no  small  part  of  his  adherents, 
were  determined  to  treat  as  spurious.  Accordingly,  after  the 
death  of  Alfonso,  his  sister  Isabel  was  considered  as  heiress 
of  the  kingdom.  She  might  have  aspired,  with  the  assist- 
ance of  the  confederates,  to  its  immediate  possession  ;  but, 
avoiding  the  odium  of  a  contest  with  her  brother,  Isabel 
agreed  to  a  treaty,  by  which  the  succession  was  absolutely 
settled  upDn  her.  This  arrangement  was  not  long  A  D  1469 
afterwards  followed  by  the  union  of  that  princess 
with  Ferdinand,  son  of  the  king  of  Aragon.  This  marriage 
was  by  no  means  acceptable  to  a  part  of  the  Castilian  oli- 
garchy, who  had  preferred  a  connection  with  Portugal.  And 
as  Henry  had  never  lost  sight  of  the  interests  of  one  whom 
he  considered,  or  pretended  to  consider,  as  his  daughter,  he 
took  the  first  opportunity  of  revoking  his  forced  disposition 
of  the  crown  and  restoring  the  direct  line  of  succession  in 
favor  of  the  princess  Joanna.  Upon  his  death,  in  1474,  the 
right  was  to  be  decided  by  arms.  Joanna  had  on  her  side 
the  common  presumptions  of  law,  the  testamentary  disposi- 
tion of  the  late  king,  the  support  of  Alfonso  king  of  Portu- 
gal, to  whom  she  was  betrothed,  and  of  several  considerable 
leaders  among  the  nobility,  as  the  young  marquis  of  Villena, 
the  family  of  Mendoza,  and  the  archbishop  of  Toledo,  who, 
charging  Ferdinand  with  ingratitude,  had  quitted  a  party 
which  he  had  above  all  men  contributed  to  strengthen.  For 
Isabella  were  the  general  belief  of  Joanna's  illegitimacy,  th<i 
assistance  of  Aragon,  the  adherence  of  a  majority  both  among 
the  nobles  and  people,  and,  more  than  all,  the  reputation  of 
ability  which  both  she  and  her  husband  had  deservedly  ac- 
quired. The  scale  was  however  pretty  equally  balanced,  till 
the  king  of  Portugal  having  been  defeated  at  Toro  in  1476, 
Joanna's  party  discovered  their  inability  to  prosecute  the  war 
by  themselves,  and  successively  made  their  submission  to 
Ferdinand  and  Isabella. 

The  Castilians   always  considered   themselves  Constitu. 
as  subject  to  a  legal  and  limited  monarchy.     For  tion  of 
several  ages  the  crown  was  elective,  as  in  mo3t  ^uccessiou 
nations  of  German  origin,  within  the  limits  of  one  of  the 
royal  family.1     In  general,  of  course,  the  public 

Defuncto  it  pace  principe,  primates    cessorum   regni  concilio  communl  coj? 
t*stius  regni  una  cum  sacerdotibus  sue-    stituant.      Concil.    Toletau.    IV     c.    75 


502  NATIONAL  COUNCILS.  Chap.  IV 

choice  fell  upon  the  nearest  heir;  and  it  became  a  prevailing 
usage  to  elect  a  son  during  the  lifetime  of  his  father,  till  about 
the  eleventh  century  a  right  of  hereditary  succession  was 
clearly  established.  But  the  form  of  recognizing  the  heir 
u| /parent's  title  in  an  assembly  of  the  cortes  has  subsisted 
until  our  ewn  time.1 

In  the  original  Gothic  monarchy  of  Spain,  civil  as  well  as 
ecclesiastical  affairs  were  decided  in  national  councils,  the 
Rational  ac^s  °f  many  of  which  are  still  extant,  and  hav<s 
councils.  been  published  in  ecclesiastical  collections.  To 
these  assemblies  the  dukes  and  other  provincial  governors, 
and  in  general  the  principal  individuals  of  the  realm,  were 
summoned  along  with  spiritual  persons.  This  double  aris- 
tocracy of  church  and  state  continued  to  form  the  great  coun- 
cil of  advice  and  consent  in  the  first  ages  of  the  new  king- 
doms  of  Leon  and  Castile.  The  prelates  and  nobility,  or 
rather  some  of  the  more  distinguished  nobility,  appear  to 
have  concurred  in  all  general  measures  of  legislation,  as  wc 
infer  from  the  preamble  of  their  statutes.  It  would  be  against 
analogy,  as  well  as  without  evidence,  to  suppose  that  any  rep- 
resentation of  the  commons  had  been  formed  in  the  earlier 
period  of  the  monarchy.  In  the  preamble  of  laws  passed  in 
1020,  and  at  several  subsequent  times  during  that  and  the 
ensuing  century,  we  find  only  the  bishops  and  magnats  re- 
A ,  .  .  cited  as  present.  According  to  the  General  Chron- 
of  deputies  icle  of  Spain,  deputies  from  the  Castilian  towns 
from  towns  formed  a  part  of  ^xtes  in  1169,  a  date  not  to  be 
rejected  as  incompatible  with  their  absence  in  1178.  How- 
ever, in  1188,  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Alfonso  IX., 
they  are  expressly  mentioned ;  and  from  that  era  were  con- 
stant and  necessary  parts  of  those  general  assemblies.2  It 
has  been  seen  already  that  the  corporate  towns  or  districts  of 

apud  Marina,  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  Pelayo  downwards  to  the   twelfth   cen- 

p.  2.    This  important  work,  by  the  author  tur\ . 

of  the  Ensayo  Historico-Critico,  quoted  '  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  7. 

ibove,  contains  an  ample  digest  of  the  9  Ensayo   Ilist.-Crit.  p.  77;  Teoria  d« 

parliamentary  law  of  Castile,  drawn  from  las   Cortes,    t.   i.    p.  66.     Marina    seems 

original  aud,  in  a  great  degree,  uupub-  to  have  somewhat  changed  his  opinion 

lished    records.      I    have    been    favored  since  the  publication  of  the  former  worn, 

with  the  use  of  a  copy,  from  which  I  am  where  he  inclines  to  assert  that  the  com- 

the  more  disposed  to  make  extracts,  as  mons  were  from  the  earliest   times   ad- 

the  book   is  likely,   through   its   liberal  mitted  into   the   legislature.      In    1188. 

principles,  to  become  almost  as  scarce  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Alfonso  IX., 

Spain  as  in  England.     Marina's  former  we  find  positive  mention  of  la  muehe- 

work  (the  Ensayo  Hist-Crit.)  furnishes  dumbre  de  las  cibdades  e  embiadoa  dt 

a   series   of  testimonies  (c.   66)    to    the  ca.da  cibdat. 
elective  character  of  the  monarchy  from 


Spain.  NATIONAL   COUNCILS.  503 

Castile  had  early  acquired  considerable  important?,  arising 
less  from  commercial  wealth,  to  which  the  towns  of  other 
kingdoms  were  indebted  for  their  liberties,  than  from  their 
utility  in  keeping  up  a  military  organization  among  the  peo- 
ple. Tc  this  they  probably  owe  their  early  reception  into 
the  cortes  as  integrant  portions  of  the  legislature,  since  we 
do  not  read  that  taxes  were  frequently  demanded,  till  the 
extravagance  of  later  kings,  and  their  alienation  of  the 
domain,  compelled  them  to  have  recourse  to  the  national 
representatives. 

Every  chief  town  of  a  concejo  or  corporation  ought  per- 
haps, by  the  constitution  of  Castile,  to  have  received  its  regu- 
lar writ  for  the  election  of  deputies  to  cortes.1  But  there 
does  not  appear  to  have  been,  in  the  best  times,  any  uniform 
practice  in  this  respect.  At  the  cortes  of  Burgos,  in  1315, 
we  find  one  hundred  and  ninety-two  representatives  from 
more  than  ninety  towns  ;  at  those  of  Madrid,  in  1391,  one 
hundred  and  twenty-six  were  sent  from  fifty  towns ;  and  the 
latter  list  contains  names  of  several  places  which  do  not  ap- 
pear in  the  former.2  No  deputies  were  present  from  the  king- 
dom of  Leon  in  the  cortes  of  Alcala  in  1348,  where,  among 
many  important  enactments,  the  code  of  the  Siete  Partidas  first 
obtained  a  legislative  recognition.8  We  find,  in  short,  a  good 
deal  more  irregularity  than  during  the  same  period  in  Eng- 
land, where  the  number  of  electing  boroughs  varied  pretty 
considerably  at  every  parliament.  Yet  the  cortes  of  Castile 
did  not  cease  to  be  a  numerous  body  and  a  fair  representa- 
tion of  the  people  till  the  reign  of  John  II.  The  first  princes 
of  the  house  of  Trastamare  had  acted  in  all  points  with  the 
advice  of  their  cortes.  But  John  II.,  and  stili  more  his  son 
Henry  IV.,  being  conscious  of  their  own  unpopularity,  did 
not  venture  to  meet  a  full  assembly  of  the  nation.  Their 
writs  were  direeted  only  to  certain  towns  —  an  abuse  for 
which  the  looseness  of  preceding  usage  had  given  a  pre- 
tence.4 It  must  be  owned  that  the  people  bore  it  in  general 
very  patiently.     Many  of   the  corporate  towns,  impoverished 

1  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  p.  139.  *  Sepades  (says  John  II.  in  1442)  que 

2  Id.  p.  148.  Geddes  gives  a  list  of  en  el  ayuntamiento  que  yo  fice  en  la 
one  hundred  and  twenty-seven  deputies  noble  villa  de  Valladolid  .  .  .  .  los  pro- 
from  forfcy-eigh*  towns  to  the  cortes  at  curadores  de  ciertas  cibdades  e  villas  de 
Madrid  in  1390  — Miscellaneous  Tracts,  mis  reynos  que  por  mi  mandado  fueron 
vol.  iii.  llamados.     This  language  is  repeated  an 

3  Xc\.  p.  164.  to  subsequent  meetings,     p  156. 


50 1  NATIONAL  COUNCILS.  Chap.  IV. 

by  civil  warfare  and  other  cause.-,  were  glad  to  sa>e  the  cost 
of  defraying  their  deputies'  expenses.  Thus,  by  the  year 
1480  only  seventeen  cities  had  retained  privilege  of  repre- 
sentation. A  vote  was  afterwards  added  for  Granada,  and 
three  more  in  later  times  for  Palencia,  and  the  provinces  of 
Estrcmadura  and  Galicia.1  It  might  have  been  easy  perhaps 
to  redress  this  grievance  while  the  exclusion  was  yet  fresh 
and  recent.  But  the  privileged  towns,  with  a  mean  and 
preposterous  selfishness,  although  their  zeal  for  liberty  was  at 
its  height,  could  not  endure  the  only  means  of  effectually 
securing  it,  by  a  restoration  of  elective  franchises  to  their 
fellow-citizens.  The  cortes  of  1506  assert,  with  one  of  those 
bold  falsifications  upon  which  a  popular  body  sometimes  ven- 
tures, that  "  it  is  established  by  some  laws,  and  by  imme- 
morial usage,  that  eighteen  cities  of  these  kingdoms  have  the 
right  of  sending  deputies  to  cortes,  and  no  more ;  "  remon- 
strating against  the  attempts  made  by  some  other  towns  to 
obtain  the  same  privilege,  which  they  request  may  not  be 
conceded.     This  remonstrance  is  repeated  in  151 2. a 

From  the  reign  of  Alfonso  XI.,  who  restrained  the  gov- 
ernment of  corporations  to  an  oligarchy  of  magistrates,  the 
right  of  electing  members  of  cortes  was  confined  to  the  ruling 
body,  the  bailiffs  or  regidores,  whose  number  seldom  exceeded 
twenty-four,  and  whose  succession  was  kept  up  by  close  elec- 
tion among  themselves.8  The  people  therefore  had  no  direct 
share  in  the  choice  of  representatives.  Experience  proved, 
as  several  instances  in  these  pages  will  show,  that  even  upon 
this  narrow  basis  the  deputies  of  Castile  were  not  deficient 
in  zeal  for  their  country  and  its  liberties.  But  it  must  be 
confessed  that  a  small  body  of  electors  is  always  liable  to  cor- 
rupt influence  and  to  intimidation.  John  II.  and  Henry  IV. 
often  invaded  the  freedom  of  election  ;  the  latter  even  named 
some  of  the  deputies.4  Several  energetic  remonstrances  were 
made  in  cortes  against  this  flagrant  grievance.  Laws  were 
enacted  and  other  precautions  devised  to  secure  the  due  re- 

1  The  cities  which  retained  their  rep-  adjacent  towns.    Thus  Toro  voted  for  Pa- 

resentation  in  cortes  were  Burgos,  To-  lencia  and  the  kingdom  of  Galicia,  before 

ledo  (there  was  a  constant  dispute  for  they  obtained  separate  votes :  Salamanca 

precedence    between    these   two).   Leon,  for  most  of  Estremadura ;   Guadalaxara 

Granada,  Cordova.  Murcia.Jaen,  Zamora.  for   Siguenza    and    four  hundred    other 

Toro,    Soria,  Valladolid,  Salamanca,  Se-  towns.     Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  p.  160,  268 

govia,  Avila,  Madrid,  Guadalaxara,  and  •  Idem,  p.  161. 

Cuenca.     The  representatives   of   these  a  Idem,  p.  86,  197. 

were  supposed  to  vote  not  only  for  their  *  Idem,  p.  199. 
immediate  constituents,   but    for  other 


Spain  CONSTITUTION  OF  CORTES.  505 

turn  of  deputies.  In  the  sixteenth  century  the  evil,  of  course, 
was  aggravated.  Charles  and  Philip  corrupted  the  members 
by  bribery.1  Even  in  1573  the-  cortes  are  bold  enough  to 
complain  that  creatures  of  government  were  sent  thither, 
"  who  are  always  held  for  suspected  by  the  other  deputies, 
and  cause  disagreement  among  them."2 

There  seems  to  be  a  considerable  obscurity  about  the  con 
stitution  of  the  cortes,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  two     .  . 
higher  estates,  the  spiritual  and  temporal  nobility,  and  tempo- 
It  is  admitted  that  down  to  the  latter  part  of  the  ?'al  nobilit^ 

.    n  P  .  ln  cortes. 

thirteenth  century,  and  especially  before  the  intro- 
duction of  representatives  from  the  commons,  they  were  sum- 
moned in  considerable  numbers.  But  the  writer  to  whom  I 
must  almost  exclusively  refer  for  the  constitutional  history 
of  Castile  contends  that  from  the  reign  of  Sancho  IV.  they 
took  much  less  share  and  retained  much  less  influence  in  the 
deliberation  of  cortes.3  There  is  a  remarkable  protest  of  the 
archbishop  of  Toledo,  in  1295,  against  the  acts  clone  in  cortes, 
because  neither  he  nor  the  other  prelates  had  been  admitted 
to  their  discussions,  nor  given  any  consent  to  their  resolutions, 
although  such  consent  was  falsely  recited  in  the  laws  enacted 
therein.4  This  protestation  is  at  least  a  testimony  to  the  con- 
stitutional rights  of  the  prelacy,  which  indeed  all  the  early 
history  of  Castile,  as  well  as  the  analogy  of  other  govern- 
ments, conspires  to  demonstrate.  In  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries,  however,  they  were  more  and  more  ex- 
cluded. None  of  the  prelates  were  summoned  to  the  cortes 
of  1299  and  1301  ;  none  either  of  the  prelates  or  nobles  to 
those  of  1370  and  1373,  of  1480  and  1505.  In  all  the  latter 
cases,  indeed,  such  members  of  both  orders  as  happened  lo 
be  present  in  the  court  attended  the  cortes  —  a  fact  which 
seems  to   be   established   by  the  language  of  the   statute-. 

1  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  p.  213.  tados  et  estrannados  et  secados  expivsa 

2  p.  202.  mente  nos  et  los  otros  perlados  et  ricoi 

3  p.  67.  homes  et  los  fijosdalgo;  et   non  fue   hi 

4  Protestamos  que  desde  aqui  venimos  eosa  fecha  con  nuestro  consejo.  Otrosi 
uon  fueinos  llamados  a  consejo,  ni  a  los  protestamos  por  razon  de  aquello  que 
tratados  soore  los  fechos  del  reyno,  ni  dice  en  los  previlegios  que  les  otorgaron, 
sohre  las  otras  cosas  que  hi  fueren  trac-  que  fueren  los  perlados  llamados,  et  que 
tadas  et  fechas,  et  sennaladamente  sobre  erau  otorgados  de  consentimieuto  et  de 
los  fechos  de  los  consejos  de  las  her-  voluntad  deltas,  que  non  fuemos  hi  pre- 
mandades  et  de  las  peticiones  que  fueron  sentes  ni  llamados  niu  fue  fecho  now 
fechas  de  su  parte,  et  sobre  los  otorga-  auestra  voluntad,  nin  consentiemos,  iutf 
mentos  que  les  ficieron,  et  sobre  los  pre-  consentimos  en  olios,  &c.  p.  72. 
yilegios  que  por  esta  nazon  les  fueron  ■'  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  p.  ?4- 
otorgados;  mas  ante  fuemos  eude  apar- 


50G  CONSTITUTION  OF  CORTES.  Chap.  IT 

Other  instances  of  a  similar  kind  may  be  adduced.  Never- 
theless, the  more  usual  expression  in  the  preamble  of  laws 
reciting  those  summoned  to" and  present  at  the  cortes,  though 
subject  to  considerable  variation,  seems  to  imply  that  all  the 
three  estates  were,  at  least  nominally  and  according  to  legiti- 
mate forms,  constituent  members  of  the  national  assembly. 
And  a  chronicle  mentions,  under  the  year  1406,  the  nobility 
and  clergy  as  deliberating  separately,  and  with  some  differ- 
ence of  judgment,  from  the  deputies  of  the  commons.1  A 
theory,  indeed,  which  should  exclude  the  great  territorial  ar- 
istocracy from  their  place  in  cortes,  would  expose  the  dignity 
and  legislative  rights  of  that  body  to  unfavorable  inferences. 
But  it  is  manifest  that  the  king  exercised  very  freely  a  pre- 
rogative of  calling  or  omitting  persons  of  both  the  highei 
orders  at  his  discretion.  The  bishops  were  numerous,  and 
many  of  their  sees  not  rich ;  while  the  same  objections  of 
inconvenience  applied  perhaps  to  the  ricoshombres,  but  far 
more  forcibly  to  the  lower  nobility,  the  hijosdalgo  or  cabal le- 
ros.  Castile  never  adopted  the  institution  of  deputies  from 
this  order,  as  in  the  States  General  of  France  and  some  other 
countries,  much  less  that  liberal  system  of  landed  representa- 
tion, which  forms  one  of  the  most  admirable  peculiarities  in 

1 1.  ii.  p.  234.     Marina  is  influenced  by  villas  e  logares  de  los  nuestros  reynos. 

a    prejudice    in    favor    of   the    abortive  (Ordinances  of  Toro  in  1371.)     Estanho 

Spanish  constitution  of  1812,  which  ex-  hi  con  el  el  infante  Don  Ferrando,  &c,  e 

eluded  the  temporal  and  spiritual  aristoc-  otros  perlados  e  cor.des  e  ricos  homes  e 

racy  from   a  place  in  the  legislature,  to  otros  caballeros  e  escuderos,  e  los  procu- 

imagine  a  similar  form  of  government  in  radores  de  las  cibdades  e  villas  e  logares 

ancient  times.     But  his  own  work  fur  de   sus   reynos.     (Cortes   of   1391.)    Los 

nishes  abundant  reasons,   if  I   am   not  tres  estados  que  deben  venir  a  las  cortes 

mistaken,   to  modify  this  opinion  very  e  ayuntamieutossegunt  se  debe  facer  e  es 

essentially.    A  few  out  of  many  instances  de   buena   costumbre  antigua.     (Cortes 

may  be  adduced  from  the  enacting  words  of  1393.)     This  last  passage  is  apparently 

of  statutes,  which  we  consider  in  England  conclusive   to   prove   that  three  estates, 

as  good  evidences  to  establish  a  coustitu-  the  superior  clergy,  the  nobility,  and  the 

tional   theory.      Sepades    que    yo   hube  commons,  were  essential  members  of  tht 

mio  acuerdo  e  mio  consejo  con  mios  her-  Legislature   in   Castile,  as   they  were   in 

manos  e  los  arzobispos,  e  los  obispos,  e  France  and  England :  and  one  is  aston 

con    los   ricos   homes  de   Castella,    e    de  ished  to  read  in  Marina  that  uo  faltaron 

Leon,  e  con  homes  buenos  de  las  villas  de  a  ninguna  de  las  form  alidades  de  derecho 

Castella.  e  de  Leon,  <|ue  fueron  conmigo  los  monarcas  que  no  tuvieron  por  opor- 

eu  Valladolit,  sobre  muchas  cosas,   &c.  tuno  llamar  a  cortes  para semejantes actos 

Alfonso   X.  in  1258)    Mandamos  enviar  ni  al  clei-o  ni  a  la  nobleza   ni  a  las  per- 

llama  por  cartas  del  rei  e  nuestras  a  los  sonas  singulares  de  uno  y  otro   estado. 

infantes  e  perlados  e  ricos  homes  e  in-  t.  i.p.69.    That  great  citizen,  Jevellanos, 

fanzones  e  cal)alleros  e  homes  buenos  de  appears  to  have  bad  much  wiser  notions 

las  cibdades  e  de  las  villas  de  los  reynos  of  the  ancient  government  of  his  country, 

de  Castilia  et  de  Toledo  e  de  Leon  e  de  as  well   as  of    the   sort  of    reformatio!) 

las  Estramaduras,  e  de  Gallicia  e  de  las  which  she  wanted  :  as  we  may  infer  from 

Asturias  e  del  Andalusia.   (Writ  of  sum-  passages  in  bis  Memoria  a  sus  eompatri- 

mons  to  cortes  of  Burgos  in  1315.)     Con  otas.  Cortina,  1811,  quoted  by  Marina  foi 

acuerdo  de  los  perlados   e   de   los   ricos  the  purpose  of  censure. 
homes  e  prouradores  de  las  cibdades  e 


Si-AiN  RIGHT   OF   TAXATION.  507 

our  own  constitution.  It  will  be  seen  hereafter  that  spiritual 
and  even  temporal  peers  were  sumnioned  by  our  kings  with 
much  irregularity ;  and  the  disordered  state  of  Castile  through 
almost  every  reign  was  likely  to  prevent  the  establishment  of 
any  fixed  usage  in  this  and  most  other  points. 

The  primary  and  most  essential  characteristic  of  a  limited 
monarchy  is  that  money  can  only  be  levied  upon  Right  of 
the  people  through  the  consent  of  their  represent-  ^a*1011- 
atives.  This  principle  was  thoroughly  established  in  Castile  : 
and  the  statutes  which  enforce  it,  the  remonstrances  which 
protest  against  its  violation,  bear  a  lively  analogy  to  corre- 
sponding circumstances  in  the  history  of  our  constitution. 
The  lands  of  the  nobility  and  clergy  were,  I  believe,  always 
exempted  from  direct  taxation  —  an  immunity  which  perhaps 
rendered  the  attendance  of  the  members  of  those  estates  in 
the  cortes  less  regular.  The  corporate  districts  or  concejos, 
which,  as  I  have  observed  already,  differed  from  the  com- 
munities of  France  and  England  by  possessing  a  large  extent 
of  territory  subordinate  to  the  principal  town,  were  bound  by 
their  charter  to  a  stipulated  annual  payment,  the  price  of  their 
franchises,  called  moneda  forera.1  Beyond  this  sum  nothing 
could  be  demanded  without  the  consent  of  the  cortes.  Al- 
fonso VIII.,  in  1177,  applied  for  a  subsidy  towards  carrying 
on  the  siege  of  Cuenca.  Demands  of  money  do  not  however 
seem  to  have  been  very  usual  before  the  prodigal  reign  of 
Alfonso  X.  That  prince  and  his  immediate  successors  were 
not  much  inclined  to  respect  the  rights  of  their  subjects ;  but 
they  encountered  a  steady  and  insuperable  resistance.  Fer- 
dinand IV.,  in  1307,  promises  to  raise  no  money  beyond  his 
legal  and  customary  dues.  A  more  explicit  law  was  enacted 
by  Alfonso  XI.  in  1328,  who  bound  himself  not  to  exact  from 
his  people,  or  cause  them  to  pay  any  tax,  either  partial  or  gen- 
eral, not  hitherto  established  by  law,  without  the  previous 
grant  of  all  the  deputies  convened  to  the  cortes.2  This  aboli- 
tion of  illegal  impositions  was  several  times  confirmed  by  the 
same  prince.     The  cortes,  in  1393,  having  made  a  grant  to 

i  Marina,  Ensayo  Hist.-Crit.  cap.  158;  et,  mihi  cum  bona  voluntate  vestra  fece- 

Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  387.     This  ritis,  nullum  servitium  faciatis. 
is  expressed  in  one   of  their  fueros,  or        2  De  los  con  echar  nin  mandar  pagai 

charters  :    Liheri  et  ingenui  semper  ma-  pecho  desaforado  ninguno,   especial  nin 

neatis,   reddendo  mihi  et  successoribus  general,  en  toda  mi  fcierra,  sin  bct  llama 

meis  in  unoquoque  anno  in  die  Pente-  dos  priuieramente  a  cortes  e  otorgado  poj 

eostes  de  uuaquaque  douio  12  denarios:  todos  los  proeuradores  que  hi  venieren 

o.  388. 


508  RIGHT     )F   TAXATION.  CHAr.  IV 

Henry  III.,  annexed  this  condition,  that  "since  they  had 
granted  him  enough  for  his  present  necessities,  and  even  to 
lay  up  a  part  for  a  future  exigency,  he  should  swear  before 
one  of  the  archbishops  not  to  take  or  demand  any  money, 
service,  or  loan,  or  anything  else,  of  the  cities  and  towns,  nor 
of  individuals  belonging  to  them,  on  any  pretence  of  necessity, 
until  the  three  estates  of  the  kingdom  should  first  be  duly 
summoned  and  assembled  in  cortes  according  to  ancient  usage. 
And  if  any  such  letters  requiring  money  have  been  written, 
that  they  shall  be  obeyed  and  not  complied  with." l  His  son, 
John  II.,  having  violated  this  constitutional  privilege  on  the 
allegation  of  a  pressing  necessity,  the  cortes,  in  1420,  pre- 
sented a  long  remonstrance,  couched  in  very  respectful  but 
equally  firm  language,  wherein  they  assert  "  the  good  custom, 
founded  in  reason  and  in  justice,  that  the  cities  and  towns  of 
your  kingdoms  shall  not  lie  compelled  to  pay  taxes  or  requi- 
'  sitions,  or  other  neAv  tribute,  unless  your  highness  order  it  by 
advice  and  with  the  grant  of  the  said  cities  and  towns,  and  of 
their  deputies  for  them."  And  they  express  their  apprehen- 
sion lest  this  right  should  be  infringed,  because,  as  they  say, 
"  there  remains  no  other  privilege  or  liberty  which  can  be 
profitable  to  subjects  if  this  be  shaken."'2  The  king  gave 
them  as  full  satisfaction  as  they  desired  that  his  encroach- 
ment should  not  be  drawn  into  precedent.  Some  fresh  abuses 
during  the  unfortunate  reign  of  Henry  IV.  produced  another 
declaration  in  equally  explicit  language,  forming  part  of  the 
sentence  awarded  by  the  arbitrators  to  whom  the  differences 
between  the  king  and  his  people  had  been  referred  at  Medina 
del  Cainpo  in  1465.3  The  catholic  kings,  as  they  are  emi 
nently  called,  Ferdinand   and   Isabella,   never   violated   this 

1  Obedecidas  e   uon  cumplidas.     This  previlegio  ni  libertad  de  que  los  subditos 

expression     occurs    frequently   in    pro-  puedan  gozar  ni  aprovechar  quebrantado 

visions  made   against  illegal  acts  of  the  el  sobre  dicho.    t.  iii.  p.  30. 

crown;  and  is  characteristic  of  the  singu-  3  Declaramos     e    ordenamos,     que     el 

lar   respect   with    which    the   Spaniards  dicho  seiior   rei  nisi  los  otros  reyes  que 

always  thought  it   right   to    treat   their  despues  del  fueren  uon  echan  nin  repar- 

sovereign,  while  they  were  resisting  the  tan  nin  pidan  pedidos  nin  monedaseusus 

abuses  cf  his  authority.  re\nos,  salvo  por  gran  necessidad,  e  sey- 

3  La  buena    costunibre    e    possession  endo  primero  accordado  con  los  perlados 

fundada  en  razon  e  en  justicia  que  las  e grandes  de  sus  reynos,  e  con  los  otros 

cibdades  e  villas  de  vuestroa  reinos  tenian  que  a  la  sazon  residierin  en  su  consejo,  e 

de  no  ser  inandado  coger  mouedas  e  pe-  seyeudo  para  ello  llauiados  los  procura- 

dilos  nin  otro  tributo  nuevo  alguno  en  dores  de  las  cibdades  e  villas  dc  sus  rey- 

los  vuestros  reinos  sin  que  la  vuestra  se-  nos,  que  para  las  tales  COSaS  se  suclen  6 

noria  lo  faga  e  ordene  de  consejo  e  con  acostumbran   llamar,  e  seyendo  per   Ioj 

otorgamiento  de  las  cibdades  e  villas  de  dichos    procuradorea    otorgado  el   dichf 

las  vuestros  reinos  e  de  sus  procuradores  pedhnento  e  monedas.    t.  ii.  p.  391 
%«i   su    nombre    ....    no   queda   otro 


Spais.  POWER  OF  THE  CORTES.  509 

part  of  the  constitution ;  nor  did  even  Charles  I.,  although 
sometimes  refused  money  by  the  cortes,  attempt  to  exact  it 
without  their  consent.1  In  the  Recopilacion,  or  code  of  Cas- 
tilian  law  published  by  Philip  II.,  we  read  a  positive  declara- 
tion against  arbitrary  imposition  of  taxes,  which  remained 
unaltered  on  the  face  of  the  statute-book  till  the  present  age.2 
The  law  was  indeed  frequently  broken  by  Philip  II. ;  but 
the  cortes,  who  retained  throughout  the  sixteenth  century  a 
degree  of  steadiness  and  courage  truly  admirable  when  we 
consider  their  political  weakness,  did  not  cease  to  remonstrate 
with  that  suspicious  tyrant,  and  recorded  their  unavailing 
appeal  to  the  law  of  Alfonso  XI.,  "  so  ancient  and  just,  and 
which  so  long  time  has  been  used  and  observed."  3 

The  free  assent  of  the  people  by  their  representatives  to 
grants  of  money  was  by  no  means  a  mere  matter  of  Control  of 
form.  It  was  connected  with  other  essential  rights  cortes  over 
indispensable  to  its  effectual  exercise ;  those  of  ex-  exPenditure- 
amining  public  accounts  and  checking  the  expenditure.  The 
cortes,  in  the  best  times  at  lea-t,  were  careful  to  grant  no 
money  until  they  were  assured  that  what  had  been  already 
levied  on  their  constituents  had  been  properly  employed.4 
They  refused  a  subsidy  in  1390  because  they  had  already 
given  so  much,  and,  "  not  knowing  how  so  great  a  sum  had 
been  expended,  it  would  be  a  great  dishonor  and  mischief  to 
promise  any  more."  In  1406  they  stood  out  a  long  time,  and 
at  length  gave  only  half  of  what  was  demanded.5  Charles  I. 
attempted  to  obtain  money  in  1527  from  the  nobility  as  well 
as  commons.  But  the  former  protested  that  "  their  obligation 
was  to  follow  the  king  in  war,  wherefore  to  contribute  money 

1  Marina  has  published  two  letters  leyes  reales,  y  que  ne  se  impusiessen 
from  Charles  to  the  city  of  Toledo,  iu  nuevas  rentas  sin  su  asistencia ;  pues 
1542andl548.  requesting  them  to  instruct  podria  v.  m.  estar  satisfecho  de  que  el 
their  deputies  to  consent  to  a  further  reino  sirve  en  las  cosas  necessarias  con 
grant  of  money,  which  they  had  refused  toda  lealtad  y  hasta  ahora  no  se  ha  pro- 
to  do  without  leave  of  their  constituents,  veido  lo  susodicho  ;  y  el  reiuo  por  la 
t.  ill.  p.  180, 187.  obligacion    que    tiene  a   pedir  a   v.    m. 

2  t.  ii.  p.  393.  guarde  la  dicha  lei,  y  que  no  solamente 

3  En  las  cortes  de  ano  de  70  y  en  las  *han  cessado  las  necessidades  de  los  sub- 
de  76  pedimos  a  v.  m.  fuese  servide  de  no  ditos  y  naturales  de  v.  m.  pero  antes 
poner  ouevos  impuestos,  rentas,  pechos,  crecen  de  cada  dia  :  vuelve  a  suplicar  a 
ni  derechos  ni  otros  tributos  particulares  v.  m.  sea  servido  concederle  lo  susodieho, 
ni  generates  sin  junta  del  reyno  en  cortes,  y  que  las  nuevas  rentas  pechos  y  dere- 
como  esta  dispuesto  por  lei  del  senor  rei  chos  se  quiten,  y  que  de  aqui  adelante 
Don  Alouso,  y  se  significo  a  v.  m.  el  dano  se  guarde  la  dicha  lei  del  senoi  rei  Don 
grande  que  con  las  nuevas  rentas  habia  Alonso,  como  tan  antigua  y  justa  y  qu« 
rescibido  el  reiuo,  suplicando  a  v.  m.  tan  to  tiempo  se  uso  y  guardo.  p.  395 
fuese  servido  de  mandarle  aliviar  y  des-  This  petition  was  in  1579. 

r.argar,  y  que  en  lo  de  adelante  se  les        4  Marina,  t.  ii.  p.  404,  406. 
hiciesse   inerced  de  guardar  las   dichas        5  p.  409. 


510  POWER  OF   THE   CORTES.  Chap.  H 

was  totally  againsl  their  privilege,  and  for  thai  reason  they 
could  not  acquiesce  in  his  majesty's  request."  l  The  commons 
also  refused  on  this  occasion.  In  1538,  on  a  similar  proposi- 
tion, the  superior  and  lower  nobility  (los  grandes  y  caballeros) 
"  begged  with  all  humility  that  they  might  never  hear  any 
more  of  that  mutter."  2 

The  contributions  granted  by  cortes  were  assessed  and 
collected  by  respectable  individuals  (hombres  buenos)  of  the 
several  towns  and  villages.3  This  repartition^  as  the  French 
call  it,  of  direct  taxes  is  a  matter  of  the  highest  importance  in 
those  countries  where  they  are  imposed  by  means  of  a  gross 
assessment  on  a  district.  The  produce  was  paid  to  the  royal 
council.  It  could  not  be  applied  to  any  other  purpose  than 
that  to  which  the  tax  had  been  appropriated.  Thus  the  cortes 
of  Segovia,  in  1407,  granted  a  subsidy  for  the  war  against 
Granada,  on  condition  "  that  it  should  not  be  laid  out  on  any 
other  service  except  this  war  ; "  which  they  requested  the 
queen  and  Ferdinand,  both  regents  in  John  II.'s  minority,  to 
confirm  by  oath.  Part,  however,  of  the  money  remaining 
unexpended,  Ferdinand  wished  to  apply  it  to  his  own  object 
of  procuring  the  crown  of  Aragon  ;  but  the  queen  first  obtained 
not  only  a  release  from  her  oath  by  the  pope,  but  the  consent 
of  the  cortes.  They  continued  to  insist  upon  this  appropria- 
tion, though  ineffectually,  under  the  reign  of  Charles  I.4 

The  cortes  did  not  consider  it  beyond  the  line  of  their  duty, 
notwithstanding  the  respectful  manner  in  which  they  always 
addressed  the  sovereign,  to  remonstrate  against  profuse  ex- 
penditure even  in  his  own  household.  They  told  Alfonso  X. 
in  1258,  in  the  homely  style  of  that  age,  that  they  thought  it 
fitting  that  the  king  and  his  wife  should  eat  at  the  rate  of  a 
hundred  and  fifty  maravedis  a  day,  and  no  more  ;  and  that  the 
king  should  order  his  attendants  to  eat  more  moderately  than 
they  did.5  They  remonstrated  more  forcibly  against  the  pro- 
digality of  John  II.  Even  in  1559  they  spoke  with  an  un- 
daunted Castilian  spirit  to  Philip  II.  :  —  "  Sir,  the  expenses  of 
your  royal  establishment  and  household  are  much  increased  ; 
and  we  conceive  it  would  much  redound  to  the  good  of  these 
kingdoms  that  your  majesty  should  direct  them  to  be  lowered, 

1  Pero  que  contribuir  a  la  guerra  con  -  Marina,  t.  ii.  p.  411. 

ciertas  sumas  era  totalmente  opuesto  a  3  Marina,  t.  ii.  p.  398. 

sus  previlegios,   e   asi   que    no    podrian  *  p.  412. 

*comodarse  a  lo  que  s.  m.   deseaba.  —  6  p.  417. 
p.  411. 


Spain.  THEIR  FORMS.  511 

both  as  a. relief  to  your  wants, and  that  all  the  great  men  and 
other  subjects  of  your  majesty  may  take  example  therefrom  to 
restrain  the  great  disorder  and  excess  they  commit  in  that 
respect."  1 

The  forms  of  a  Castilian  cortes  were  analogous  to  those  of 
an  English  parliament  in  the  fourteenth  century.  Forms  of 
They  were  summoned  by  a  writ  almost  exactly  co- thecortes- 
incident  in  expression  with  that  in  use  among  us.?     The  ses- 
sion  was  opened  by  a  speech  from  the  chancellor  or  other 
chief  officer  of  the  court.     The  deputies  were  invited  to  con 
sider  certain  special  business,  and  commonly  to  grant  money. 
After  the  principal  affairs  were  despatched  they  conferred  to 
gether,   and,   having  examined  the  instructions  of  their  re- 
spective constituents,  drew  up  a  schedule  of  petitions.     These 
were  duly  answered  one  by  one ;  and  from  the  petition  and 
answer,  if  favorable,  laws  were  afterwards  drawn  up  where 
the  matter  required  a  new  law,  or  promises  of  redress  were 
given  if  the  petition  related  to  an  abuse  or  grievance.     In 
the  struggling  condition  of  Spanish  liberty  under  Charles  I., 
the  crown  began  to  neglect  answering  the  petitions  of  cortes, 
or  to  use  unsatisfactory  generalities  of  expression.     This  gave 
rise  to  many  remonstrances.     The  deputies  insisted  in  1523 
on  having  answers  before  they  granted  money.    They  repeat 
ed  the  same  contention  in   1525,  and  obtained  a  general  law 
inserted  in  the   Recopilacion  enacting  that  the  king  should 
answer  all  their  petitions  before  he  dissolved  the  assembly.4 
This,  however,  was  disregarded  as  before  ;   but  the  cortes, 
whose  intrepid  honesty  under  Philip  II.  so  often  attracts  our 
admiration,  continued  as  late  as  1586  to  appeal  to  the  written 
statute  and  lament  its  violation.5 

According  to  the  ancient  fundamental  constitution  of  Castile, 
the  king  did  not  legislate  for  his  subjects  without  Right  of 
their  consent.     The  code  of  the  Visigoths,  called  cortes  in 
in  Spain  the  Fuero  Jusgo,  was  enacted  in  public 
councils,  as  were  also  the  laws  of  the  early  kings  of  Leon, 
which  appears  by  the  reciting  words  of  their  preambles.6  This 

i  Senhcr,   los    gastos   <le  vuestro  real  desorden  y  excessos  que  hacen  en  lai 

estado  y  mesa  son  muy  crescidos,  y  en-  cosas  sobredichas.     p.  437. 
tendemos  que  convernia  mucho  al  bieu        -  Marina,  t.  i.  p.  175  ;  t.  iii.  p.  103. 
le  estos  reinos  que  v.  m.  los  maudasse        3  t.  i.  p.  278. 
moderar,  asi  para  algun  remedio  de  sus        4  p.  301. 
neeessidades,  como  para  que  de  v.  m.  to-        5  p.  288-304. 

men  egemplo  totos  los  grandes  y  cabal-         6  t.  ii.  p.  202      Tbe  acts  ot  trie  cortef 

leros  y  otios  subditos  de  v.  m.  en  la  gran  of  Leon  in  1020  run  tlius  :  Omues  pou 


512  LEGISLATIVE  RIGHT  Chap.  IV 

consent  was  originally  given  only  by  the  higher  estates,  whc 
might  be  considered,  in  a  large  sense,  as  representing  the  na 
lion,  though  not  chosen  by  it ;  but  from  the  end  of  the  twelftl 
century  by  the  elected  deputies  of  the  commons  in  cortes 
The  laws  of  Alfonso  X.  in  1258,  those  of  the  same  prince  in 
1274,  and  many  others  in  subsequent  times,  are  declared  to 
be  made  with  the  consent  (con  acuerdo)  of  the  several  orders 
of  the  kingdom.  More  commonly,  indeed,  the  preamble  of 
Castilian  statutes  only  recites  their  advice  (consejo)  ;  but  I 
do  not  know  that  any  stress  is  to  be  laid  on  this  circumstance. 
The  laws  of  the  Siete  Partidas,  compiled  by  Alfonso  X..  did 
not  obtain  any  direct  sanction  till  the  famous  cortes  of  Alcala, 
in  1348,  when  they  were  confirmed  along  with  several  others, 
forming  altogether  the  basis  of  the  statute-law  of  Spain.1 
Whether  they  were  in  fact  received  before  that  time  has  been 
a  matter  controverted  among  Spanish  antiquaries,  and  upon 
the  question  of  their  legal  validity  at  the  time  of  their  pro- 
mulgation depends  an  important  point  in  Castilian  history,  the 
disputed  right  of  succession  between  Sancho  IV.  and  the  in- 
fants of  la  Cerda  ;  the  former  claiming  under  the  ancient 
customary  law,  the  latter  under  the  new  dispositions  of  the 
Siete  Partidas.  If  the  king  could  not  legally  change  the  es- 
tablished laws  without  consent  of  his  cortes,  as  seems  most 
probable,  the  right  of  representative  succession  did  not  exist 
in  favor  of  his  grandchildren,  and  Sancho  IV.  cannot  be  con- 
sidered as  an  usurper. 

It  appears,  upon  the  whole,  to  have  been  a  constitutional 
principle,  that  laws  could  neither  be  made  nor  annulled  ex- 
cept in  cortes.  In  150 G  this  is  claimed  by  the  deputies  as  an 
established  right.2  John  I.  had  long  before  admitted  that 
what  was  done  by  cortes  and  general  assemblies  could  not  be 
undone  by  letters  missive,  but  by  such  cortes  and  assemblies 
alone.3     For  the  kings  of  Castile  had  adopted  the  English 

tiflces  et  abbates  et  optimates  regni  His-  publication   of  these  two  works,  iu  the 

patriae  jussu  ipsius  regis  talia  decreta  de-  former  of  which  he  contends  for  the  pre- 

•Jrevimus  quae  firmiter  teneautur  futuris  vious  authority  of  the  Siete  Partidas,  and 

temporibus.     So  those  of  Salamanca,  in  fci  favor  of  the  infants  of  la  Cerda. 
1178:    Ego  rex   Feruandus  inter  csetera        -  Los  reye*   establicieron   que  cuando 

quae   cum   episcopis   et  abbatibus   regni  hubiesen  de  hacer  leyes,  para  que  fueseu 

nostri  et  quamplurimia   aliis    religiosis,  provechosas  a  sus  reynos  y  cada  provik 

euin  eoinitibus  terrarum  et  principibus  cias  fuesen  proveidas,  se  llamasen  corte* 

et  rectoribus   provinciarum,    toto   posse  y  procuradores  que  enteudiesen  en  ellns, 

tenenda  statuimus  apud  Salamancam.  y   por  esto   se   establecio   lei   que  no  m 

1  finsayo  Hist.-Crit.  p.  353;   Teoria  de  hiciesen  ni  renovasen  leyes  sino  en  cortes 

las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  77.     Mariua  seems  to  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  218. 
aave  changed  his   opinion  between  the        3  Lo   que  es   fecho    por    cortes   e   por 


Spain.  OF  THE  CORTES.  513 

practice  of  dispensing  with  statutes  by  a  non  obstante  clause 
in  their  grants.     But  the  cortes  remonstrated  more  steadily 
against  this  abuse  than  our  own  parliament,  who  suffered  it  to 
remain  in  a  certain  degree  till  the  Revolution.    It  was  sever- 
al times  enacted  upon  their  petition,  especially  by  an  explicit 
statute  of  Henry  II.,  that  grants  and  letters-patent  dispensing 
with  statutes  should  not  be  obeyed.1     Nevertheless,  John  II., 
trusting  to  force  or  the  servility  of  the  judges,  had  the  assur- 
ance to  dispense  explicitly  with  this  very  law.2     The  cortes  of 
Valladolid,  in  1442,  obtained  fresh  promises  and  enactments 
against  such  an  abuse.     Philip  I.  and  Charles  I.  began  to 
legislate  without  asking  the  consent  of  cortes  ;  this  grew  much 
worse  under  Philip  II.,  and  reached  its  height  under  his  suc- 
cessors, who  entirely  abolished  all  constitutional  privileges.8 
In  1555  we  find  a  petition  that  laws  made  in  cortes  should  be 
revoked  nowhere  else.     The  reply  was  such  as  became  that 
age :  "  To  this  we  answer,  that  we  shall  do  what  best  suits 
our  government."     But  even  in   1619,  and  still  afterwards, 
the  patriot  representatives  of  Castile  continued  to  lift  an  un- 
availing voice  against  illegal  ordinances,  though  in  the  form 
of  veryhumble  petition  ;  perhaps  the  latest  testimonies  to  the 
expiring  liberties  of  their  country.4     The  denial  of  exclusive 
legislative  authority  to  the  crown  must,  however,  be  under- 
stood to  admit  the  legality  of  particular  ordinances  designed 
to  strengthen  the  king's  executive  government.5     These,  no 
doubt,  like    the    royal    proclamations  in  England,  extended 
sometimes  very  far,  and  subjected  the  people  to  a  sort  of  ar- 
bitrary coercion  much  beyond  what  our  enlightened  notions  of 
freedom  would    consider  as  reconcilable  to  it.      But  in  the 
middle  ages  such  temporary  commands  and  prohibitions  were 
not  reckoned  strictly  legislative,  and  passed,  perhaps  rightly, 
for  inevitable  consequences  of  a  scanty  code,  and  short  sessions 
of  the  national  council. 

The  kings  were  obliged  to  swear  to  the  observance  of  laws 
enacted  in  cortes,  besides  their  general  coronation  oath  to 
keep  the  laws  and  preserve  the  liberties  of  their  people.  Of 
this  we  find  several  instances  from  the  middle  of  the  thir- 

ayuntamientos  que  non  se  pueda  disfacer  4  Ha  suplicado  eJ  reino  a  v.  in.  no  se 

nor  las  tales  cartas,  salvo   por  ayunta  yroinulgueii  nuevas  leva,,  til  en  todo  in 

mienta<<  e  cortes.     Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  *n  parte  las  antiguas  se  alteren,  sm  que 

t  ii.  p.  215.  ««a  Por  cortes  ....  y  por  ser  de  tanta 

i  p.  215.  importancia  vuelve  el  reino  a  suplicarlo 

2  p!  216  ;  t.  iii.  p.  40.  humilmente  a  v.  in.    p.  220 

3  t.  ii.  p.  218.  5  P-  207. 
VOL    I . -r-M.                       33 


514  RIGHTS   OF  TILE  CORTES.  Chap.  IV 

teenth  century,  and  'he  practice  continued  till  the  time  of 
John  II.,  who,  in  143J  on  being  requested  to  swear  to  tin 
laws  then  enacted,  answered  that  he  intended  to  maintain 
them,  and  consequently  no  oath  was  necessary;  an  evasion 
in  which  the  cortes  seem  unaccountably  to  have  acquiesced.1 
The  guardians  of  Alfonso  XI.  not  only  swore  to  observe  all 
that  had  been  agreed  on  at  Burgos  in  1315,  but  consented  that, 
if  any  one  of  them  did  not  keep  his  oath,  the  people  should 
no  longer  be  obliged  to  regard  or  obey  him  as  regent. - 

It   was   customary   to   assemble   the   cortes   of  Castile  for 
many   purposes   besides   those  of  granting  money 
of  the   e        and  concurring  in   legislation.     They   were   surn- 
cortes.  moned  in  every  reign  to  acknowledge  and  confirm 

the  succession  of  the  heir  apparent ;  and  upon  his  accession 
to  swear  allegiance.3  These  acts  were,  however,  little  more 
than  formal,  and  accordingly  have  been  preserved  for  the 
sake  of  parade  after  all  the  real  dignity  of  the  cortes  was 
annihilated.  In  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  they 
claimed  and  exercised  very  ample  powers.  They  assumed 
the  right,  when  questions  of  regency  occurred,  to  limit  the 
prerogative,  as  well  as  to  designate  the  persons  who  weie  to 
use  it.4  And  the  frequent  minorities  of  Castilian  kings, 
which  were  unfavorable  enough  to  tranquillity  and  subordina- 
tion, served  to  confirm  these  parliamentary  privileges.  The 
cortes  were  usually  consulted  upon  all  material  business.  A 
law  of  Alfonso  XI.  in  1328,  printed  in  the  Recopilacion  or 
code  published  by  Philip  II.,  declares,  "  Since  in  the  arduous 
affairs  of  our  kingdom  the  counsel  of  our  natural  subjects  is 
necessary,  especially  of  the  deputies  from  our  cities  and  town-, 
therefore  we  ordain  and  command  that  on  such  great  occa- 
sions the  cortes  shall  be  assembled,  and  counsel  shall  be  taken 
of  the  three  estates  of  our  kingdoms,  as  the  kings  our  fore- 
fathers have  been  used  to  do." 5  A  cortes  of  John  II.,  in 
1419,  claimed  this  right  of  being  consulted  in  all  matters  of 
importance,  with  a  warm  remonstrance  against  the  alleged 
violation  of  so  wholesome  a  law  by  the  reigning  prince ;  who 
answered,  that  in  weighty  matters  he  had  acted,  and  would 
continue  to  act,  in  conformity  to  it.6  "What  should  be  intend- 
ed by  great  and  weighty  affairs  might  be  not  at  all  agreed 

i  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t  \  p.  306.  4  p.  230. 

2  t.  iii.  p.  62.  5  t.  i.  p.  31 

«t.  i.  p.  33;t.  ii.  p.  24.  G  p   34. 


.Spain.  COUNCIL   OF   CASTILE.  515 

upon  by  the  two  parties;  to  each  of  who  «e  interpretations 
these  words  gave  pretty  full  scope.  However,  the  current 
usage  of  the  monarchy  certainly  permitted  much  authority 
in  public  deliberations  to  the  cortes.  Among  other  instances, 
which  indeed  will  continually  be  found  in  the  common  civil 
histories,  the  cortes  of  Ocana.  in  146'J,  remonstrate  with  Hen- 
ry IV.  for  allying  himself  with  England  rather  than  France, 
and  give,  as  the  first  reason  of  complaint,  that,  "  according  to 
the  laws  of  your  kingdom,  when  the  kings  have  anything  of 
great  importance  in  hand,  they  ought  not  to  undertake  it 
without  advice  and  knowledge  of  the  chief  towns  and  cities 
of  your  kingdom."  1  This  privilege  of  general  interference 
was  asserted,  like  other  ancient  rights,  under  Charles,  whom 
they  strongly  urged,  in  1548,  not  to  permit  his  son  Philip  to 
depart  out  of  the  realm.2  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  observe, 
that,  in  such  times,  they  had  little  chance  of  being  regarded. 

The  kings  of  Leon  and  Castile  acted,  during  the  interval 
of  the  cortes,  by  the  advice  of  a  smaller  council,  council  of 
answering,  as  it  seems,  almost  exactly  to  the  Castile- 
king's  ordinary  council  in  England.  In  early  ages,  before  the 
introduction  of  the  commons,  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  dis- 
tinguish this  body  from  the  general  council  of  the  nation ; 
being  composed,  in  fact,  of  the  same  class  of  persons,  though 
in  smaller  numbers.  A  similar  difficulty  applies  to  the  Eng- 
lish history.  The  nature  of  their  proceedings  seems  best  to 
ascertain  the  distinction.  All  executive  acts,  including  those 
ordinances  which  may  appear  rather  of  a  legislative  nature, 
all  grants  and  charters,  are  declared  to  be  with  the  assent 
of  the  court  (curia),  or  of  the  magnats  of  the  palace,  or  of 
the  chiefs  or  nobles.3  This  privy  council  was  an  essential 
part  of  all  European  monarchies  ;  and,  though  the  sovereign 
might  be  considered  as  free  to  call  in  the  advice  of  whomso- 
ever he  pleased,  yet,  in  fact,  the  princes  of  the  blood  and 
most  powerful  nobility  had  anciently  a  constitutional  right  to 
be  members  of  such  a  council,  so  that  it  formed  a  very  mate- 
rial check  upon  his  personal  authority. 

The  council  underwent  several  changes  in  progress  of  time, 
which  it  is  not  necessary  to  enumerate.    It  was  justly  deemed 

i  Porque,   segunt    leyes    de    nuestros  -  t.  iii.  p.  183. 

reynos,  cuando   los  reyes  nan   de  facer  3  Cumassensu  magnatum  palatii:  Cum 

aiguua  cosa  de  gran  importancia,  uon  lo  consiliot-uriic  uieye:  Cum  consilioetbene- 

leben  facer  sin  consejo  e  sabiduria  de  las  placito  omnium  principummeorum,  nullo 

cibdadciJ  e  villas  priucipales  de  vuestros  contradicente  nee  reclaniente.     leoria  de 

reynos.     Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  241.  las  Cortes,  t.  iii.  p.  325. 


516  ADMINISTRATION   OF  JUSTICE.  Chap.  IV 

an  important  member  of  the  constitution,  and  the  cortea 
showed  a  laudable  anxiety  to  procure  its  composition  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  form  a  guarantee  for  the  due  execution  of 
laws  after  their  own  dissolution.  Several  times,  especially  in 
minorities,  they  even  named  its  members  or  a  part  of  them 
and  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  III.  aud  John  II.  they  obtains 
the  privilege  of  adding  a  permanent  deputation,  consisting 
of  four  persons  elected  out  of  their  own  body,  annexed  as  it 
were  to  the  council,  who  were  to  continue  at  the  court  dur- 
ing the  interval  of  cortes  and  watch  over  the  due  observance 
of  the  laws.1  This  deputation  continued  as  an  empty  formal- 
ity in  the  sixteenth  century.  In  the  council  the  king  was 
bound  to  sit  personally  three  days  in  the  week.  Their  busi- 
ness, which  included  the  whole  executive  government,  was 
distributed  with  considerable  accuracy  into  what  might  be 
despatched  by  the  council  alone,  under  their  own  seals  and 
signatures,  and  what  required  the  royal  seal.2  The  consent 
of  this  body  was  necessary  for  almost  every  act  of  the  crown : 
for  pensions  or  grants  of  money,  ecclesiastical  and  political 
promotions,  and  for  charters  of  pardon,  the  easy  concession 
of  which  was  a  great  encouragement  to  the  homicides  so 
usual  in  those  ages,  and  was  restrained  by  some  of  our  own 
laws.3  But  the  council  did  not  exercise  any  judicial  authori- 
ty, if  we  may  believe  the  well-informed  author  from  whom  I 
have  learned  these  particulars ;  unlike  in  this  to  the  ordi- 
nary council  of  the  kings  of  England.  It  was  not  until  the 
days  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  that  this,  among  other  inno- 
vations, was  introduced.4 

Civil  and  criminal  justice  was  administered,  in  the  first 
Adminis-  instance,  by  the  alcaldes,  or  municipal  judges  of 
trationof  towns ;  elected  within  themselves,  originally,  by 
the  community  at  large,  but,  in  subsequent  times, 
by  the  governing  body.  In  other  places  a  lord  possessed  the 
right  of  jurisdiction  by  grant  from  the  crown,  not,  what  we 
find  in  countries  where  the  feudal  system  was  more  thorough- 
ly established,  as  incident  to  his  own  territorial  superiority 
The  kings,  however,  began  in  the  thirteenth  century  to  ap- 
point judges  of  their  own,  called  corregidores,  a  name  which 
seems  to  express  concurrent  jurisdiction  with  the  regidores, 
or  ordinary  magistrates.5    The  cortes  frequently  remonstrat- 

1  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  IJ46.  4  t.  ii.  p.  375,  379- 

2  p.  354.  5  Alfonso  X.  says,  Xiuguu  oine  sea  osadfl 
8  p.  360,  362,  372.                                          juzgar  pleytos,  se  uo  fuere  alcalde  pucsto 


&pain.  ACTIONS   OF  CASTILIAN   KINGS.  517 

ed  against  this  encroachment.  Alfonso  XI.  consented  to 
withdraw  his  judges  from  all  corporations  by  which  he  had 
not  been  requested  to  appoint  them.1  Some  attempts  to  in- 
terfere with  the  municipal  authorities  of  Toledo  produced 
serious  disturbances  under  Henry  III.  and  John  II.2  Even 
where  the  king  appointed  magistrates  at  a  city's  request,  he 
was  bound  to  select  them  from  among  the  citizens.8  From 
this  immediate  jurisdiction  an  appeal  lay  to  the  adelantado 
or  governor  of  the  province,  and  from  thence  to  the  tribunal 
of  royal  alcaldes.4  The  latter,  however,  could  not  take  cog- 
nizance of  any  cause  depending  before  the  ordinary  judges ; 
a  contrast  to  the  practice  of  Aragon,  where  the  justiciary's 
right  of  evocation  (juris  firma)  was  considered  as  a  principal 
safeguard  of  public  liberty.5  As  a  court  of  appeal,  the  royal 
alcaldes  had  the  supreme  jurisdiction.  The  king  could  only 
cause  their  sentence  to  be  revised,  but  neither  alter  nor  re- 
voke it.6  They  have  continued  to  the  present  day  as  a  criminal 
tribunal ;  but  civil  appeals  were  transferred  by  the  ordinances 
of  Toro  in  1371  to  a  new  court,  styled  the  king's  audience, 
which,  though  deprived  under  Ferdinand  and  his  successors 
of  part  of  its  jurisdiction,  still  remains  one  of  the  principal 
judicatures  in  Castile.7 

No  people  in  a  half-civilized  state  of  society  have  a  full 
practical  security  against  particular  acts  of  arbi- 

nTi  ,  Violent 

trary  power.      I  hey  were   more  common  perhaps  actions  of 
in  Castile  than  in  any  other  European  monarchy  ^^^^ 

„  -„  f  J   ot  Castile. 

which  protessed  to  be  tree.  .Laws  indeed  were  not 
wanting  to  protect  men's  lives  and  liberties,  as  well  as  their 
properties.  Ferdinand  IV.,  in  1299,  agreed  to  a  petition 
that  "justice  shall  be  executed  impartially  according  to  law 
and  right;  and  that  no  one  shall  be  put  to  death  or  imprison- 
ed, or  deprived  of  his  possessions,  without  trial,  and  that  this 
be  better  observed  than  heretofore."  8  He  renewed  the  same 
law  in  1307.  Nevertheless,  the  most  remarkable  circum- 
ftance  of  this  monarch's   history  was  a  violation  of  so  sacred 

pol  el  rey.    Td.  fol.  27.    This  seems  an  many  other   passages,   will  not  confuse 

encroachment  on    the    municipal  mag-  the  attentive  reader. 

istrates.  8  Que   niandase    facer    la    justicia  en 

1  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  251.  aqueilos  que  la  merecen  comunahnente 

-  p.  255.    Mariana,  1.  xx.  c.  13.  con  fuero  e  con  derecho  e  los  homes  que 

'  p.  255.  nonseau  muertos  did  presosnin  tornados 

1  p.  266.  lo  que  hau  sin  ser  oidos  por  derecho  6 

6  p.  260.  por  fuero  de  aquel  logar  do  acaesciere, 

6  p.  287,  304.  6  que  sea  guardado  mejor  que  se  guardd 

i  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  292-302.  fastaaqui.    Mar  oa,  Bnsayo  Hist  -Critics 

The  use  of  the  present  tense  iu  this  and  p.  148 


518  CONFEDERACIES   OF  NOBILITY.  Chap.  \V 

and  apparently  so  well-established  a  law.  Two  gentlemen  hav- 
ing been  accused  of  murder,  Ferdinand,  without  waiting  for 
any  process,  ordered  them  to  instant  execution.  They  sum- 
moned him  with  their  last  words  to  appear  before  the  tribunal 
of  God  in  thirty  days ;  and  his  death  within  the  time,  which 
has  given  him  the  surname  of  the  Summoned,  might,  we  may 
hope,  deter  succeeding  sovereigns  from  iniquity  so  flagrant. 
i>ut  from  the  practice  of  causing  their  enemies  to  be  assas- 
sinated, neither  law  nor  conscience  could  withhold  them. 
Alfonso  XI.  was  more  than  once  guilty  of  this  crime.  Yet 
he  too  passed  an  ordinance  in  1325  that  no  warrant  should 
issue  for  putting  any  one  to  death,  or  seizing  his  property, 
till  he  should  be  duly  tried  by  course  of  law.  Henry  II. 
repeats  the  same  law  in  very  explicit  language.1  But  the 
civil  history  of  Spain  displays  several  violations  of  it.  An 
extraordinary  prerogative  of  committing  murder  appears  to 
have  been  admitted  in  early  times  by  several  nations  who  did 
not  acknowledge  unlimited  power  in  their  sovereign.2  Before 
any  regular  police  was  established,  a  powerful  criminal  might 
have  been  secure  from  all  punishment,  but  for  a  notion,  as 
barbarous  as  any  which  it  served  to  counteract,  that  he  could 
be  lawfully  killed  by  the  personal  mandate  of  the  king.  And 
the  frequent  attendance  of  sovereigns  in  their  courts  of  ju- 
dicature misrht  lead  men  not  accustomed  to  consider  the 
indispensable  necessity  of  legal  forms  to  confound  an  act  of 
assassination  with  the  execution  of  justice. 

Though  it  is  very  improbable  that  the  nobility  were  not 
^  considered  as  essential  members  of  the  cortes,  they 

achsofthe  certainly  attended  in  smaller  numbers  than  we 
nobility.  should  expect  to  find  from  the  great  legislative  and 
deliberative  authority  of  that  assembly.  This  arose  chiefly 
from  the  lawless  spirit  of  that  martial  aristocracy  which  plac- 
ed less  confidence  in  the  constitutional  methods  of  resisting 
arbitrary  encroachment  than  in  its  own  armed  combinations.3 
Such  confederacies  to  obtain  redress  of  grievances  by  force, 
of  which  there  were  five  or  six  remarkable  instances,  were 
called  Hermandad   (brotherhood  or  union),  and,  though  not 

1  Que  non  manderuos  ruatar  nin  pren-  2  Si  quia  hoininem  per  jussionem  regis 

der  nin  lisiar  nin  despechar  nin  tomar  a  vel  ducis  Bui   occiderit,    non   requinitur 

alguno  ninguna  cosa  de  lo  suyo,  sin  ser  ei,  nee  sit  faidosus,  quia  jussio  domini  sui 

ante  llamado  e  oido  e  vencido  por  fuero  fuit,  etnonpotuitcontradicerejussionein 

e  por  derecho,  por  querella  nin  por  que-  Leges   Baju variorum,  tit.   ii.   in     Balm 

rellas  que  a  QOa  fuesen  dadas,  Begun  t  que  C&pitularibus. 

eato  esta  ordenado  por  el  rei  dou  Alonso  8  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii.  p.  465 
nueetro  padre.    Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  ii. 
0  287 


Si'AJN.  CONFEDERACIES   OF  NOBILITY.  519 

so  explicitly  sanctioned  as  they  were  by  the  celebrated 
Privilege  of  Union  in  Aragon,  found  countenance  in  a 
law  of  Alfonso  X.,  which  cannot  be  deemed  so  much  to  have 
voluntarily  emanated  from  that  prince  as  to  be  a  record  of 
original  rights  possessed  by  the  Castilian  nobility.  "  The 
duty  of  subjects  towards  their  king,"  he  says,  "  enjoins  them 
not  to  permit  him  knowingly  to  endanger  his  salvation,  nor 
to  incur  dishonor  and  inconvenience  in  his  person  or  family, 
nor  to  produce  mischief  to  his  kingdom.  And  this  may  be 
fulfilled  in  two  ways  :  one  by  good  advice,  showing  him  the 
reason  wherefore  he  ought  not  to  act  thus ;  the  other  by 
deeds,  seeking  means  to  prevent  his  going  on  to  his  own 
ruin,  and  putting  a  stop  to  those  who  give  him  ill  counsel . 
forasmuch  as  his  errors  are  of  worse  consequence  than  those 
of  other  men,  it  is  the  bounden  duty  of  subjects  to  prevent 
his  committing  them.1  To  this  law  the  insurgents  appealed 
in  their  coalition  against  Alvaro  de  Luna ;  and  indeed  we 
must  confess  that,  however  just  and  admirable  the  principles 
which  it  breathes,  so  general  a  license  of  rebellion  was  not 
likely  to  preserve  the  tranquillity  of  a  kingdom.  The  depu- 
ties of  towns  in  a  cortes  of  1445  petitioned  the  king  to 
declare  that  no  construction  should  be  put  on  this  law  incon- 
sistent with  the  obedience  of  subjects  towards  their  sove- 
reign :   a  request  to  which  of  course  he  willingly  acceded. 

Castile,  it  will  be  apparent,  bore  a  closer  analogy  to  Eng- 
land in  its  form  of  civil  polity  than  France  or  even  Aragon. 
But  the  frequent  disorders  of  its  government  and  a  barbar- 
ous state  of  manners  rendered  violations  of  law  much  more 
continual  and  flagrant  than  they  were  in  England  under  the 
Plantagenet  dynasty.  And  besides  these  practical  mischiefs, 
there  were  two  essential  defects  in  the  constitution  of  Castile, 
through  which  perhaps  it  was  ultimately  subverted.  It 
wanted  those  two  brilliants  in  the  coronet  of  British  liberty, 
the  representation  of  freeholders  among  the  commons,  and 
trial  by  jury.  The  cortes  of  Castile  became  a  congress  of 
deputies  from  a  few  cities,  public-spirited  indeed  and  intrepid, 
as  Ave  find  them  in  bad  times,  to  an  eminent  degree,  but  too 
much  limited  in  number,  and  too  unconnected  with  the  terri- 
torial aristocracy,  to  maintain  a  just  balance  against  the 
crown.  Yet,  with  every  disadvantage,  that  country  pos.-es-ed 
a  liberal  form  of  government,  and  was  animated  with  a  noble 
spirit  for  its  defence.      Spain,  in   her  late  memorable  though 

l  Enaayo  Hist.-Critico,  p.  312 


5-20  AFFAIRS   OF  AKAGON.  Chap.  IV 

short  resuscitation,  might  well  have  gone  back  to  her  ancient 
institutions,  and  perfected  a  scheme  of  policy  which  the  great 
example  of  England  would  have  shown  to  be  well  adapted  to 
the  security  of  freedom.  What  she  did,  or  rather  attempted, 
instead,  I  need  not  recall.  May  her  next  effort  be  more 
wisely  planned,  and  more  happily  terminated ! 1 

Though  the  kingdom  of  Aragon  was  very  inferior  in  ex 
Affairs  of  tent  to  that  of  Castile,  yet  the  advantages  of  a 
Amgon.  better  form  of  government  and  wiser  sovereigns, 
with  those  of  industry  and  commerce  along  a  line  of  sea- 
coast,  rendered  it  almost  equal  in  importance.  Castile  rarely 
intermeddled  in  the  civil  dissensions  of  Aragon  ;  the  kings  of 
Aragon  frequently  carried  their  arms  into  the  heart  of  Castile. 
During  the  sanguinary  outrages  of  Peter  the  Cruel,  and  the 
stormy  revolutions  which  ended  in  establishing  the  house  of 
Trastamare,  Aragon  was  not  indeed  at  peace,  nor  altogether 
well  governed ;  but  her  political  consequence  rose  in  the 
eyes  of  Europe  through  the  long  reign  of  the  ambitious  and 
wily  Peter  IV.,  whose  sagacity  and  good  fortune  redeemed, 
according  to  the  common  notions  of  mankind,  the  iniquity 
with  which  he  stripped  his  relation  the  king  of  Majorca  of 
the  Balearic  islands,  and  the  constant  perfidiousness  of  his 
character.  I  have  mentioned  in  another  place  the  Sicilian 
war,  prosecuted  with  so  much  eagerness  for  many  years  by 
Peter  III.  and  his  son  Alfonso  III.  After  this  object  was 
relinquished  James  II.  undertook  an  enterprise  less  splendid, 
but  not  much  less  difficult :  the  conquest  of  Sardinia.  That 
island,  long  accustomed  to  independence,  cost  an  incredible 
expense  of  blood  and  treasure  to  the  kings  of  Aragon  dur- 
ing the  whole  fourteenth  century.  It  was  not  fully  subdued 
till  the  commencement  of  the  next,  under  the  reign  of  Martin. 

At  the  death  of  Martin  king  of  Aragon,  in  1410,  a  mem- 
Disputed  orable  question  arose  as  to  the  right  of  succession, 
eucce^ion  Though  Petronilla,  daughter  of  Ramiro  II.,  had 
death  of  reigned  in  her  own  right  from  1137  to  1172,  an 
Martin:  opinion   seems  to   have   gained   ground  from   the 

thirteenth  century  that  females  could  not  inherit  the  crown 
of  Aragon.  Peter  IV.  had  excited  a  civil  war  by  attempting 
to  settle  the  succession  upon  his  daughter,  to  the  exclusion 
of  his  next  brother.  The  birth  of  a  son  about  the  same  time 
suspended  the  ultimate  decision  of  this  question  ;  but  it  was 
tacitly  understood  that  what  is  called  the  Salic  law  ought  to 

1  The  first  edition  of  this  work  was  published  in  181S 


»r\iN. 


DISPUTED   SUCCESSION. 


521 


prevail.1  Accordingly,  on  the  death  of  John  I.  in  1395,  his 
two  daughters  were  set  aside  in  favor  of  his  brother  Martin, 
though  not  without  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  elder,  whose 
husband,  the  count  of  Foix,  invaded  the  kingdom,  and  de- 
sisted from  his  pretension  only  through  want  of  force.  Mar- 
tin's son,  the  king  of  Sicily,  dying  in  his  father's  lifetime,  the 
nation  was  anxious  that  the  king  should  fix  upon  his  successor, 
and  would  probably  have  acquiesced  in  his  choice.  But  his 
dissolution  occurring  more  rapidly  than  was  expected,  the 
throne  remained  absolutely  vacant.  The  count  of  Urgel  had 
obtained  a  grant  of  the  lieutenancy,  which  was  the  right  of 
the  heir  apparent.  This  nobleman  possessed  an  extensive 
territory  in  Catalonia,  bordering  on  the  Pyrenees.  He  was 
grandson  of  James,  next  brother  to  Peter  IV.,  and,  according 
to  our  rules  of  inheritance,  certainly  stood  in  the  first  place. 
The  other  claimants  were  the  duke  of  Gandia,  grandson  of 
James  II.,  who,  though  descended  from  a  more  distant  ances- 
tor, set  up  a  claim  founded  on  proximity  to  the  royal  stock, 
which  in  some  countries  was  preferred  to  a  representative 
title  ;  the  duke  of  Calabria,  son  of  Violante,  younger  daughter 
of  John  I.  (the  countess  of  Foix  being  childless) ;  Frederic 
count  of  Luna,  a  natural  son  of  the  younger  Martin  king  of 
Sicily,  legitimated  by  the  pope,  but  with  a  reservation  ex- 
cluding him  from  royal  succession ;  and  finally,  Ferdinand, 
infant  of  Castile,  son  of  the  late  king's  sister.2    The  count  of 

i  Zurita,  t.  ii.  f.  188.  It  was  pretended  that  women  were  excluded  from  the 
crown  in  England  as  well  as  France  :  and  this  analogy  seems  to  have  had  some  in- 
fluence in  determining  the  Aragonese  to  adopt  a  Salic  law. 

2  The  subjoined  pedigree  will  show  more  clearly  the  respective  titles  of  the  com- 
petitors : — 

James  II.  died  1327. 


Alfonso  IV.  d.  1336. 
I 


D.  of  Gandia 


Peter  IV.  d.  1337. 
I 


Eleanor  Q.  of  Castile.     John  I.  d.  1395.      Martin, 

d.  1410. 

I  I 

Henry  III.    Ferdinand. 
K.  of  Castile.  Martin 


I  I 

James        D.  of  Gandia . 
C.  of  Urgel, 

| 

Peter 

C.  of  Urgel. 


C.  of  Urgel 


|  |       K.  of  Sicily,  1409. 

Joanna  Violante 

John  II.        Countess     Q.  of  Naples. 
K.  of  Castile,     of  Foix.  Frederic 

C.  of  Luna 
Louis  D.  of 
Calabria. 


522  DISPUTED   SUCCESSION.  Chat.  TV 


uzz 


Urgel  was  favored  in  general  by  the  Catalans,  and  lie  seemed 
to  have  a  powerful   support  in  Antonio  de  Luna,  a  baron  of 
Aragon,  so  rich  that  he  might  go  through  his  own  estate  from 
France  to  Castile.     But  this  apparent  superiority  frustrated 
his  hopes.      The  justiciary  and  other  leading  Aragonese  were 
determined  not  to  sutler  this  great  constitutional  question  to 
be  decided  by  an  appeal  to  force,  which  might  sweep  away 
their  liberties  in  the  struggle.     Urgel,  confident  of  his  right, 
and  surrounded  by  men  of  ruined  fortunes,  was  unwilling  to 
submit    his   pretensions   to   a   civil   tribunal.     His   adherent, 
Antonio  de    Luna,  committed  an  extraordinary  outrage,  the 
assassination  of  the  archbishop  of  Saragosa,  which  alienated 
the   minds  of  good  citizens  from  his  cause.      On  the  other 
hand,  neither  the  duke  of  Gandia,  who  was  very  old,1  nor  the 
count  of  Luna,  seemed  fit  to  succeed.     The  party  of  Ferdi- 
nand, therefore,  gained  ground  by  degrees.    It  was  determined 
however,  to   render  a  legal   sentence.     The  cortes  of  each 
nation   agreed  upon   the   nomination   of  nine   persons,  three 
Aragonese,  three    Catalans,  and   three  Valencians,  who  were 
to  discuss  the  pretensions  of  the  several  competitors,  and  by 
a  plurality  of  six  votes  to  adjudge  the  crown.    Nothing  could 
be   more   solemn,  more   peaceful,  nor,  in   appearance,  more 
equitable  than  the  proceedings  of  this  tribunal.     They  sum- 
moned the  claimants  before  them,' and  heard  them  by  counsel. 
One  of  these,  Frederic  of  Luna,  being  ill  defended,  the  court 
took  charge  of  his  interests,  and  named  other  advocates  to 
maintain  them.     A  month  was  passed  in  hearing  arguments ; 
a  second  was  allotted  to  considering  them ;  and  at  the  expira- 
tion of  the  prescribed  time  it  was  announced  to  the  people, 
by  the  mouth  of  St.  Vincent  Ferrier,  that  Ferdinand  of  Cas- 
tile had  ascended  the  throne.2 

i  This  duke  of  Gandia  died  during  the  vote.     Zurita,  t.  hi.  f.  71.     It  i9  curious 

interregnum.     His  son,  though  not  so  enough  that  John  king  of  Castile  was  al- 

•   objectionable  on  the  score  of  age,  seemed  together  disregarded  ;  though   his  claim 

to  have  a  worse  claim  ;  yet  he  became  a  was  at  least  as  plausible  as  that  of  his 

competitor.  uncle  Ferdinand.    Indeed,  upon  the  priu- 

a  Biancae  Coramentaria,  in  Schotti  His-  ciples  of  inheritance  to  which  we  are  ac- 

pania   Illustrata,    t.  ii.    Zurita,   t.  iii.  f.  customed,  Louis  duke  of  Calabria  had  a 

1-74.     Vincent  Ferrier  was  the  most  dis-  prior  right  to  Ferdinand,  admitting  the 

tinguished   churchman    of    his   time   in  rule  which  it  was  necessary  for  both  of 

Spain.     His  influence,  as  one  of  the  nine  them  to  establish  :  namely,  that  a  right  of 

judges.  i>  said  to  have  been  very  instru-  succession  might  be  transmitted  through 

mental  in  procuring  the  crown  for  Ferdi-  females,  which  females  could  not  person- 

nand.     Five  others  voted  the  same  way  ;  ally  enjoy.     This,  as   is  well   known,  had 

one  for  the  count  of  Urgel;  one  doubt-  been  advanced  in   the  preceding  age  by 

fully   between   the  count   of  Urgel  and  Edward   III.    as    the   foundation   of  hb 

duke  of  Gandia  ;  the  ninth  declined  to  claim  to  the  crown  of  France. 


SpAm  KINGS   OF  ARAGON.  523 

In   this   decision  it   is  impossible  not  to  suspect  that  the 
judges  were  swayed  rather  by  politic  considera-  Decision  in 
tions  than  a  strict  sense  of  hereditary  right     It  £lvorof 

.if.,  •  %,       °  ierdinand 

was  therefore,  by  no   means   universally  popular,  of  CastUe. 
especially  in   Catalonia,  of  which  principality  the  a.d.  1412. 
count  of  Urgel  was  a  native ;  and  perhaps  the  great  rebellion 
of  the  Catalans  fifty  years  afterwards  may  be  traced  to  the 
disaffection  which  this  breach,  as  they  thought,  of  the  lawful 
succession  had  excited.     Ferdinand  however  was  well  received 
in  Aragon.     The  cortes  generously  recommended  the  count 
of  Urgel  to  his  favor,  on  account  of  the  great  expenses  he  had 
incurred  in  prosecuting  his  claim.     But  Urgel  did  not  wait 
the  effect  of  this  recommendation.      Unwisely  attempting  a 
rebellion  with  very  inadequate  means,  he  lost  his  estates,  and 
was  thrown  for  life  into  prison.     Ferdinand's  successor  was 
his  son,  Alfonso  V.,  more  distinguished  in  the  his-  Alfonso  v 
tory  of  Italy  than  of  Spain.     For  all  the  latter  AD- 141°- 
years  of  his  life  he  never  quitted  the  kingdom  that  he  had 
acquired  by  his  arms ;  and,  enchanted  by  the  delicious  air  of 
Naples,  intrusted  the  government  of  his  patrimonial  territories 
to  the  care  of  a  brother  and  an  heir.     John  II.,  johnu. 
upon  whom  they  devolved  by  the  death  of  Alfonso  AD- u®- 
without  legitimate  progeny,  had  been  engaged  during  his  youth 
in  the  turbulent  revolutions  of  Castile,  as  the  head  of  a  strong 
party  that  opposed  the  domination  of  Alvaro  de  Luna.     By 
marriage  with  the  heiress  of  Navarre  he  was  entitled,  accord- 
ing to  the  usage  of  those  times,  to  assume  the  title  of  king, 
and  administration  of  government,  during  her  life.     But  his 
ambitious  retention  of  power  still  longer  produced  events 
which  are  the  chief  stain  on  his  memory.     Charles 
prince  of  Viana  was,  by  the  constitution  of  Na-  A'D'  1430' 
varre,  entitled  to  succeed  his  mother.     She  had  requested 
him  in  her  testament  not  to  assume  the  government  without 
his  father's    consent.     That   consent  was   always 
withheld.     The  prince  raised  what  we  ought  not  AD' 1442" 
to  call  a  rebellion ;  but  was  made  prisoner,  and  remained  for 
some  time  in  captivity.    John's  ill  disposition  towards  his  sou 
was  exasperated  by  a  step-mother,  who  scarcely  disguised  hei 
intention  of  placing  her  own  child  on  the  throne  of  Aragon 
at  the  expense  of  the  eldest-born.     After  a  life  of  perpetual 
oppression,  chiefly  passed  in  exile  or  captivity,  the  prince  of 
Viana  died  in   Catalonia,  at  a  moment  when  that  province 


524  CONSTITUTION   OF  ARAGON.  Chap.  IV 

was  in  open  insurrection  upon  his  account.     Though  it  hardly 
seem-  that  the  Catalans  had  any  more  general  pro- 

A.D.  1461.  .  ,  i    n  .1 

vocations,  they  persevered  for  more  than  ten  years 
with  inveterate  obstinacy  in  their  rebellion,  offering  the 
sovereignty  first  to  a  prince  of  Portugal,  and  afterwards  to 
Re"-nier  duke  of  Anjou,  who  was  destined  to  pass  his  life  in 
unsuccessful  competition  for  kingdoms.  The  king  of  Aragon 
behaved  with  great  clemency  towards  these  insurgents  on 
their  final  submission. 

It  is  consonant  to  the  principle  of  this  work  to  pass  lightly 
over  the  common  details  of  history,  in  order  to  fix  the  reader's 

attention  more  fully  on  subjects  of  philosophical  in- 
tion  of  quiry.     Perhaps  in  no  European  monarchy  except 

Aragon.  om.  Qwn  wag  t|ie  form  0f  g0vernni,_>nt  more  inter- 

esting than  in  Aragon,  as  a  fortunate  temperament  of  law 
and  justice  with  the  royal  authority.  So  far  as  anything 
originally  a  can  be -pronounced  of  its  earlier  period  before  the 
mvt  of  regal  capture  of  Saragosa  in  1118,  it  was  a  kind  of 
ana  racy.  regai  aristocracy,  where  a  small  number  of  power- 
ful barons  elected  their  sovereign  on  every  vacancy,  though, 
as  usual  in  other  countries,  out  of  one  family;  and  considered 
him   as   little   more   than   the    chief    of    their    confederacy.1 

These  were  the  ricoshombres  or  barons,  the  first 
oAhe^icos-  order  of  the  state.  Among  these  the  kings  of 
hombresor     Aragon,   in    subsequent    times,   as   they  extended 

their  dominions,  shared  the  conquered  territory  in 
grants  of  honors  on  a  feudal  tenure.2  For  this  system  was 
fully  established  in  the  kingdom  of  Aragon.  A  ricohombre, 
as  we  read  in  Vitalis  bishop  of  Huesca,  about  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century,3  must  hold  of  the  king  an  honor  or 
barony  capable  of  supporting  more  than  three  knights ;  and 

i  Alfonso  III.  complained  that  his  bar-  tenian  del  rey,  eran  obligados  de  seguir 

ons  wanted    to  bring  back  old    times,  al  rey,  si  yva  en  persona  a  la  guerra,  y 

quando  havia  en  el  reyno  tantos  reyes  residir  en  ella  tres  meses  en  cadaun  ano. 

romo  ricos  hombres.     Biancae  Commen-  Zurita,  t.  i.  fol.  43.    (Saragosa,  1610)    A 

taria,  p.  787.     The  form  of  election  sup-  fief    was   usually    called    iu    Aragon   an 

posed  to  have  been  used  by  these  bold  honor,  que  en  Castilla  llamavan  tierra,  y 

barons  is  well  known.     "  We,  who  are  en  el  principado  de  Catalans  feudo.    fol. 

us  good  as  you,  choose  you  for  our  king  46. 

and  lord,  provided  that  you  observe  our  3  I  do  not  know  whether  this  work  of 

laws  and   privileges;  and   if  not,  not."  Vitalis  has  been  printed;  but  there  are 

Rut  I  do  not  much  believe  the  authen-  large  extracts  from  it  in  Blaneas's  history, 

ticitj   of  this  form  of  words.      See  Rob-  and  also  in  Du  Cange.  under  the  words 

ertson'e  Charles  V.  vol.  i.  note  31.    It  Infancia,  Mesnadarius,  &c.  Several  illus 

is.  however,  sufficiently  agreeable  to  the  trations  of  these  military  tenures  may  b* 

spirit  of  the  old  government.  found  in  the  Fueros  de  Aragon,  especial 

*  Los  ricos  hombres,  por  los  feudos  que  ly  lib.  7- 


Spain  CONSTITUTION   OF  ARAGON.  525 

this  lie  was  bound  to  distribute  among  his  vassals  in  military 
fiefs.  Once  in  the  year  he  might  be  summoned  with  his  feu- 
dataries  to  serve  the  sovereign  for  two  months  (Zurita  says 
three)  ;  and  he  was  to  attend  the  royal  court,  or  general 
assembly,  as  a  counsellor,  whenever  called  upon,  assisting  in 
its  judicial  as  well  as  deliberative  business.  In  the  towns 
and  villages  of  his  barony  he  might  appoint  bailiffs  to  ad- 
minister justice  and  receive  penalties ;  but  the  higher  crimi- 
nal jurisdiction  seems  to  have  been  reserved  to  the  crown. 
According  to  Vitalis,  the  king  could  divest  these  ricoshombres 
of  their  honors  at  pleasure,  after  which  they  fell  into  the 
class  of  mesnadaries,  or  mere  tenants  in  chief.  But  if  this 
were  constitutional  in  the  reign  of  James  I.,  which  Blancas 
denies,  it  was  not  long  permitted  by  that  high-spirited  aris- 
tocracy. By  the  General  Privilege  or  Charter  of  Peter  III. 
it  is  declared  that  no  barony  can  be  taken  away  without  a 
yust  cause  and  legal  sentence  of  the  justiciary  and  council 
of  barons.1  And  the  same  protection  was  extended  to  the 
vassals  of  the  ricoshombres. 

Below  these  superior  nobles  were  the  mesnadaries,  cor- 
responding to  our  mere  tenants  in  chief,  holding  Lower 
estates  not  baronial  immediately  from  the  crown ;  nobility- 
and  the  military  vassals  of  the  high  nobility,  the  knights  and 
infanzones ;  a  word  which  may  be  rendered  by  gentlemen. 
These  had  considerable  privileges  in  that  aristocratic  govern- 
ment ;  they  were  exempted  from  all  taxes,  they  could  only 
be   tried  by  the  royal  judges  for  any  crime ;  and  offences 
committed  against  them  were  punished  with  addi-  Burgesses 
tional  severity.2     The  ignoble  classes  were,  as  in  and 
other  countries,  the  burgesses  of  towns,  and  the  peasan  ry< 
villeins  or  peasantry.     The  peasantry  seem  to  have  been 
subject  to  territorial  servitude,  as  in  France  and  England. 
Vitalis  says  that  some  villeins  were  originally  so  unprotected 
that,  as  he  expresses  it,  they  might  be  divided  into  pieces  by 
sword  among  the  sons  of  their  masters,  till  they  were  pro- 
voked to  an  insurrection,  which  ended  in  establishing  certain 
stipulations,  whence  they  obtained  the  denomination  of  villeins 
ae  parada,  or  of  convention.3 

Though  from  the  twelfth  century  the  principle  Liberties 
of  hereditary  succession  to  the  throne  superseded,  Aragones* 
in  Aragon  as  well  as   Castile,  the   original   right  kingdom 

»  Biancae  Comm.  p.  730.  2  p.  732.  3  Biancse  Comm.  p.  729 


5^6  PRIVILEGES   OF   AKAGON.  Chap.  IV 

of  choosing  a  sovereign  within  the  royal  family,  it  was 
still  founded  upon  one  more  sacred  and  fundamental,  that 
of  compact.  No  king  of  Aragon  was  entitled  to  assume 
that  name  until  he  had  taken  a  coronation  oath,  administered 
by  the  justiciary  at  Saragosa,  to  observe  the  laws  and  liber- 
ties of  the  realm.1  Alfonso  III.,  in  1285,  being  in  France 
at  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  named  himself  king  in  ad- 
dressing the  states,  who  immediately  remonstrated  on  this 
premature  assumption  of  his  title,  and  obtained  an  apology.'2 
Thus,  too,  Martin,  having  been  called  to  the  crown  of  Ara- 
gon by  the  cortes  in  1395,  was  specially  required  not  to 
exercise  any  authority  before  his  coronation.3 

Blancas  quotes  a  noble  passage  from  the  acts  of  cortes  in 
1451.  "  We  have  always  heard  of  old  time,  and  it  is  found 
by  experience,  that,  seeing  the  great  barrenness  of  this  land, 
and  the  poverty  of  the  realm,  if  it  were  not  for  the  liberties 
thereof,  the  folk  would  go  hence  to  live  and  abide  in  other 
realms  and  lands  more  fruitful."  4  This  high  spirit  of  free- 
dom had  lono;  animated  the  Aragonese.  After  several  con- 
tests  with  the  crown  in  the  reign  of  James  I.,  not  to  go  back 
General  to  earn'er  times,  they  compelled  Peter  III.  in  1283 
Privilege  to  grant  a  law,  called  the  General  Privilege,  the 
of  1283.  Magna  Charta  of  Aragon,  and  perhaps  a  more 
full  and  satisfactory  basis  of  civil  liberty  than  our  own.  It 
contains  a  series  of  provisions  against  arbitrary  tallages, 
spoliations  of  property,  secret  process  after  the  manner 
of  the  Inquisition  in  criminal  charges,  sentences  of  the 
justiciary  without  assent  of  the  cortes,  appointment  of 
foreigners  or  Jews  to  judicial  offices ;  trials  of  accused  per- 
sons  in   places   beyond   the   kingdom,  the    use   of   torture, 

i  Zurita,  Anales  de  Aragon,  t.  i.  fol.  104,  Aragon  was,  in  fact,   a  poor    country 

t.  iii.  fol.  76.  barren  and  ill-peopled.     The  kings  were 

2  Biancae  Comm.  p.  661.  They  ac-  forced  to  go  to  Catalonia  for  money,  and 
knowledged,  at  the  same  time,  that  he  indeed  were  little  able  to  maintain  ex- 
was  their  natural  lord,  and  entitled  to  pensive  contests.  The  wars  of  Peter  IV. 
reign  as  lawful  heir  to  his  father  —  so  in  Sardinia,  and  of  Alfonso  V.  with 
Oddly  were  the  hereditary  and  elective  Genoa  ami  Naples,  impoverished  their 
titles  jumbled  together.  Zurita,  t.  i.  people.  A  hearth-tax  having  been  iin- 
fol.  303.  posed  in   1404,  it  was  found  that  there 

3  Zurita.  t.  ii.  fol.  424.  were  42.683  houses  in   Aragon,   which, 
*  Siempre  havemos  oydo  dezir  antiga-    according  to  most  calculations,  will  give 

ment.  e  se  troba  por  es'periencia,  que  at-  less  than  300,000  inhabitants.     In  1429, 

tendida  la   grand   sterilidad  de  aquesta  a  similar  tax  being  laid  on.  it  is  said  that 

tierra,  e  pobreza  de  aqueste  regno,  si  the  number  of  houses  was  diminished  in 

non  fues  por  las  libertades  de  aquel,  se  consequence  of  wax.  Zurita,  t.  iii.  fol 

yrian  a  bivir,  y  habitar  las  gentes  a  otros  It  contains  at   present  between   61 

**gnos,  e  tierras  mas  frutieras.    p.  571.  and  700.000  inhabitants. 


Spain.  REVOLT  AGAINST  PETER  IV.  527 

except  in  charges  of  falsifying  the  coin,  and  the  bribery 
of  judges.  These  are  claimed  as  the  ancient  liberties  of 
their  co.vntry.  "Absolute  power  (mero  imperio  e  mixto), 
it  is  declared,  never  was  the  constitution  of  Aragon,  nor 
of  Valencia,  nor  yet  of  Ribagorca,  nor  shall  there  be  in 
time  to  come  any  innovation  made  ;  but  only  the  law,  custom, 
and  privilege  which  has  been  anciently  used  in  the  aforesaid 
kingdoms.1 

The    concessions    extorted   by  our  ancestors  from  John, 
Henry  III.,  and  Edward  I.,  were  secured  by  the  priviiege 
only  guarantee  those  times  could  afford,  the  deter-  of  Union- 
initiation  of  the  barons  to  enforce  them  by  armed  confedera 
cies.     These,  however,  were  formed  according  to  emergencies, 
and,  except  in  the   famous   commission  of  twenty-five   con 
servators  of  Magna  Charta,  in  the  last  year  of  John,  were 
certainly  unwarranted  by  law.      But  the  Aragon ese  estab- 
lished a  positive  right  of  maintaining  their  liberties  by  arms. 
This  was  contained  in  the   Privilege  of  Union  granted  by 
Alfonso  III.  in  1287,  after  a  violent  conflict  with  his  subjects  ; 
but  which  was  afterwards  so  completely  abolished,  and  even 
eradicated  from  the  records  of  the  kingdom,  that  its  precise 
words   have   never  been  recovered.2     According  to   Zurita, 
it   consisted  of  two   articles :    first,  that   in   the   case   of  the 
king's  proceeding  forcibly  against  any  member  of  the  union 
without  previous  sentence  of  the  justiciary,  the  rest  should 
be  absolved  from  their  allegiance ;  secondly,  that  he  should 
hold  cortes  every  year  in  Saragosa.8  During  the  two  subsequent 
reigns  of  James  II.  and  Alfonso  IV.  little  pretence  seems  tc 
have  been  given  for  the  exercise  of  this  right.   ,  But  dissen- 
sions breaking  out   under    Peter    IV.  in    1347,    rather  on 
account  of  his  attempt  to  settle  the  crown  upon  his  daughtei 
than  of  any  specific  public  grievances,  the  nobles  had  recours 
to  the  Union,  that  last  voice,  says  Blancas,  of  an  Revolt 
ahnost  expiring  state,  full  of  weight  and  dignity,  against 
to  chastise  the  presumption  of  kings.4     They  as- 

1  Fueros  de  Aragon,  fol.  9 ;  Zurita,  t.  i.        3  Zurita,  t.  i.  fol.  322. 

fol.  265.  4  Priscam  ilium    Oniouis,   quasi    nio 

2  Blancas  says  that  he  had  discovered  rieutis  reipublicse  extremam  vocem,  auc 
a  copy  of  the  Privilege  of  Union  in  the  toritatis  et  gra>itatU  plenam,  regum  in- 
archives  of  the  see  of  Tarragona,  and  solentia;  apertum  vindicem  excit&runt, 
■would  gladly  have  published  it,  but  for  summl  ae  singulari  bonorum  omnium 
his  deference  to  the  wisdom  of  former  conseusioue.  p.  669.  It  is  remarkable 
ages,  which  had  studiously  endeavored  that  such  strong  language  should  havw 
to  destroy  all  recollection  of  that  dan-  been  tolerated  under  Philip  II 

cerous  law.     p.  662. 


528  PRIVILEGE  OF  UNION   ABOLISHED.         Chap.  IV. 

yemblect  at  Saragosa,  and  used  a  remarkable  seal  for  all  their 
public  instruments,  an  engraving  from  which  may  be  seen 
in  the  historian  I  have  just  quoted.  It  represents  the  king 
sitting  on  his  throne,  with  the  confederates  kneeling  in  a 
suppliant  altitude  around,  to  denote  their  loyalty  and  unwil- 
lingness to  offend.  But  in  the  background  tents  and  lines  of 
spears  are  discovered,  as  a  hint  of  their  ability  and  resolution 
to  defend  themselves.  The  legend  is  Sigillum  Unionis  Ara- 
gonum.  This  respectful  demeanor  towards  a  sovereign 
against  whom  they  were  waging  war  reminds  us  of  the 
language  held  out  by  our  Long  Parliament  before  the  Pres- 
byterian party  was  overthrown.  And  although  it  has  been 
lightly  censured  as  inconsistent  and  hypocritical,  this  tone  is 
the  safest  that  men  can  adopt,  who,  deeming  themselves 
under  the  necessity  of  withstanding  the  reigning  monarch, 
are  anxious  to  avoid  a  change  of  dynasty,  or  subversion  of 
their  constitution.  These  confederates  were  defeated  by  the 
king  at  Epila  in  1348.1  But  his  prudence  and  the  remaining 
strength  of  his  opponents  inducing  him  to  pursue  a  moderate 
course,  there  ensued  a  more  legitimate  and  permanent  balance 
of  the  constitution  from  this  victory  of  the  royalists.  The 
„  .  .,  Privilege  of  Union  was  abrogated,  Peter  himself 

Privilege  °        .  ....  °,  '       .    . 

of  Union  cutting  to  pieces  with  his  sword  the  original  mstru- 
otnerIied'  nient.  But  in  return  many  excellent  laws  for  the 
provisions  security  of  the  subject  were  enacted ; 2  and  their 
preservation  was  intrusted  to  the  greatest  officer 
of  the  kingdom,  the  justiciary,  whose  authority  and  pre- 
eminence may  in  a  great  degree  be  dated  from  this  period.8 
That  watchfulness  over  public  liberty,  which  originally  be- 
longed to  the  aristocracy  of  ricoshombres,  always  apt  to 
thwart  the  crown  or  to  oppress  the  people,  and  which  was 
afterwards  maintained  by  the  dangerous  Privilege  of  Union, 
became  the  duty  of  a  civil  magistrate,  accustomed  to  legal 
rules  and  responsible  for  his  actions,  whose  office  and  func- 

i  Zurita  observes   that  the  battle  of  from  thence  the  name  of  Union  was,  by 

Epila  was  the  last  fought  in  defence  of  common  consent,  proscribed,     t.  ii.  fol. 

public  liberty,  for  which  it  was  held  law-  226.     Blancas  also  remarks  that  nothing 

ful  of  old  to  take  up  arms,  and  resist  the  could  have  turned  out  more  advantageous 

king,  by  virtue  of  the  Privileges  of  Union,  to  the  Aragouese  than  their  ill  fortune  at 

For  the  authority  of  the  justiciary  being  Epila. 

afterwards  established,  the  former  con-  2  Fueros  de  Aragon.     De  iis,  quae  De- 
tentions and  wars  came  to  au  end  ;  means  minus  rex.     fol   14,  et  alibi  pussiiu. 
being  found  to  put  the  weak  on  a  level  3  Bianc.   Comm.   p.  671,  811  ;   Zurita, 
with  the  powerful,  in  which  consists  the  t.  ii.  fol.  229. 
peace  and  tranquillity  of  all  states ;  and 


Spain.  OFFICE  OF  JUSTICIARY.  529 

tions   are    the    most    pleasing   feature    in    the  constitutional 
history  of  Aragon. 

The  justiza  or  justiciary  of  Aragon  has  been  treated  by 
some  writers  as  a  sort  of  anomalous  magistrate,  office  of 
created  originally  as  an  intermediate  power  be-  Justic»aty. 
tween  the  king  and  people,  to  watch  over  the  exercise  of 
royal  authority.  But  I  do  not  perceive  that  his  functions 
were,  in  any  essential  respect,  different  from  those  of  the  chief 
justice  of  England,  divided,  from  the  time  of  Edward  I., 
among  the  judges  of  the  King's  Bench.  We  should  under- 
value our  own  constitution  by  supposing  that  there  did  not 
reside  in  that  court  as  perfect  an  authority  to  redress  the  sub- 
ject's injuries  as  was  possessed  by  the  Aragonese  magistrate. 
In  the  practical  exercise,  indeed,  of  this  power,  there  was  an 
abundant  difference.  Our  English  judges,  more  timid  and 
pliant,  left  to  the  remonstrances  of  parliament  that  redress  of 
grievances  which  very  frequently  lay  within  the  sphere  of 
their  jurisdiction.  There  is,  I  believe,  no  recorded  instance 
of  a  habeas  corpus  granted  in  any  case  of  illegal  imprison- 
ment by  the  crown  or  its  officers  during  the  continuance  of 
the  Plantagenet  dynasty.  We  shall  speedily  take  notice  of  a 
very  different  conduct  in  Aragon. 

The  office  of  justiciary,  whatever  conjectural  antiquity 
some  have  assigned  to  it,  is  not  to  be  traced  beyond  the  cap- 
ture of  Saragosa  in  1118,  when  the  series  of  magistrates 
commences.1  But  for  a  great  length  of  time  they  do  not  ap- 
pear to  have  been  particularly  important ;  the  judicial  author- 
ity residing  in  the  council  of  ricoshombres,  whose  suffrages 
the  justiciary  collected,  in  order  to  pronounce  their  sentence 
rather  than  his  own.  A  passage  in  Vitalis  bishop  of  Huesca, 
whom  I  have  already  mentioned,  shows  this  to  have  been  the 
practice  during  the  reign  of  James  I.2  Gradually,  as  notions 
of  liberty  became  more  definite,  and  laws  more  numerous,  the 
reverence  paid  to  their  permanent  interpreter  grew  stronger, 
and  there  was  fortunately  a  succession  of  prudent  and  just 
men  in  that  high  office,  through  whom  it  acquired  dignity  and 
stable  influence.     Soon  after  the  accession  of  James  II.,  on 

i  Biancae  Comment,  p.  638.  ing  of  Vitalis,  his  testimony  seems  to  be 

2  Id.  p.  772      Zurita  indeed  refers  the  beyond  dispute.     By  the  General  Privi 

justiciary's    preeminence    to  an   earlier  lege  of  1283,  the  justiciary  wan  to  advise 

date,  namely,  the  reign  of  Peter  IT.,  who  with  the  ricoshombres,  in  all  cases  where 

took  away  a  great  part  of  the  local  juris-  the  king  was  a  party  against  any  of  hiu 

dictions  of  the  ricoshombres.  t.  i.  fol.  102.  subjects.     Zurita,  f.   281.      See    also    f 

But  if  I  do  not  migunderstand  the  mean-  180- 
VOL.   I.  —  M.                           34 


530  PROCESSES   OF  Chap.  IT 

some  dimensions  arising  between  the  king  and  his  barons,  he 
called  in  the  justiciary  as  a  mediator  whose  sentence,  says 
Blaneas,  all  obeyed.1  At  a  subsequent  time  in  the  same 
reign  the  military  orders,  pretending  that  some  of  their  privi- 
leges were  violated,  raised  a  confederacy  or  union  against  the 
king.  James  offered  to  refer  the  dispute  to  the  justiciary, 
Ximenes  Salanova,  a  man  of  eminent  legal  knowledge.  The 
knights  resisted  his  jurisdiction,  alleging  the  question  to  be  of 
spiritual  cognizance.  He  decided  it,  however,  against  them 
in  full  cortes  at  Saragosa,  annulled  their  league,  and  sen- 
tenced the  leaders  to  punishment.2  It  was  adjudged  also  that 
no  appeal  could  lie  to  the  spiritual  court  from  a  sentence  of 
the  justiciary  passed  with  assent  of  the  cortes.  James  IT.  is 
said  to  have  frequently  sued  his  subjects  in  the  justiciary's 
court,  to  show  his  regard  for  legal  measures ;  and  during  the 
reign  of  this  good  prince  its  authority  became  more  established.8 
Yet  it  was  not  perhaps  looked  upon  as  fully  equal  to  maintain 
public  liberty  against  the  crown,  till  in  the  cortes  of  1348, 
after  the  Privilege  of  Union  was  forever  abolished,  such  laws 
were  enacted,  and  such  authority  given  to  the  justiciary,  as 
proved  eventually  a  more  adequate  barrier  against  oppression 
than  any  other  country  could  boast.  All  the  royal  as  well 
as  territorial  judges  were  bound  to  apply  for  his  opinion  in 
case  of  legal  difficulties  arising  in  their  courts,  which  he  was 
to  certify  within  eight  days.  By  subsequent  statutes  of  the 
same  reign  it  was  made  penal  for  any  one  to  obtain  letters 
from  the  king,  impeding  the  execution  of  the  justiza's  process, 
and  they  were  declared  null.  Inferior  courts  were  forbid- 
den to  proceed  in  any  business  after  his  prohibition.4  Many 
other  laws  might  be  cited,  corroborating  the  authority  of  this 
great  magistrate ;  but  there  are  two  parts  of  his  remedial  ju- 
risdiction which  deserve  special  notice. 

Processes  of  These  are  the  processes  of  jurisfirma,  or  firma  del 
aucTmau^1*  derecho,  and  of  manifestation.  The  former  bears 
festation.        some  analogy  to  the  writs  of  pone  and  certiorari 

1  Zurita,  p.  663.  surname  of  Just,  el  Juflticiero,  by  his  fair 

2Zurita,  t.  i.  f.  403;  t.  ii.  f.  34;  Bian.  dealings   towards   his  subjects.     Zurita, 

p.  666.    The  assent  of  the  cortes  seems  t.  ii.  fol.  82.     El  Justiciero  properly  de- 

to  render  this  in  the  nature  of  a  legis-  notes  his  exercise  of  civil  and  criminal 

lative,  rather  than  a  judicial  proceeding  ;  justice. 

but  it  is  difficult  to  pronounce  anything        4  Fueros  de  Aragon  :    Quod  in  dubiii 

about  a  transaction  so  remote  in  time,  non  crassis.   (a. d.  1348.)  Quodimpetrauj 

and  in  a  foreign  country,  the  native  his-  (1372),  &c.    Zurita,  t.  ii.  fol.  229.    Bianp 

torians  writing  rather  concisely.  p.  671  and  811. 
Bianc .  p.  663.     James  acquired   the 


Svms.  JURISFIRMA  AND   MANIFESTATION.  531 

in  England,  through  which  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  exer- 
cises its  right  of  withdrawing  a  suit  from  the  jurisdiction 
of  inferior  tribunals.  But  the  Aragonese  jurisfirma  was  of 
more  extensive  operation.  Its  object  was  not  only  to  bring 
a  cause  commenced  in  an  inferior  court  before  the  jus- 
ticiary, but  to  prevent  or  inhibit  any  process  from  issuing 
against  the  person  who  applied  for  its  benefit,  or  any  mo- 
lestation from  being  offered  to  him ;  so  that,  as  Blancas  ex- 
presses it,  when  we  have  entered  into  a  recognizance  (firme 
et  graviter  asseveremus)  before  the  justiciary  of  Aragon  to 
abide  the  decision  of  law,  our  fortunes  shall  be  protected, 
by  the  interposition  of  his  prohibition,  from  the  intolerable 
iniquity  of  the  royal  judges.1  The  process  termed  manifesta- 
tion afforded  as  ample  security  for  personal  liberty  as  that  of 
jurisfirma  did  for  property.  "  To  manifest  any  one,"  says 
the  writer  so  often  quoted,  "  is  to  wrest  him  from  the  hands 
of  the  royal  officers,  that  he  may  not  suffer  any  illegal  vio- 
lence ;  not  that  he  is  at  liberty  by  this  process,  because  the 
merits  of  his  case  are  still  to  be  inquired  into  ;  but  because  he 
is  now  detained  publicly,  instead  of  being  as  it  were  con- 
cealed, and  the  charge  against  him  is  investigated,  not  sud- 
denly or  with  passion,  but  in  calmness  and  according  to  law, 
therefore  this  is  called  manifestation."  2     The  power  of  this 

1  p.  751.     Fueros  de  Aragon,  f.  137.  festationibus  personarum.  Independently 

2  Est  apud  uos  mauifestare,  reuin  of  this  right  of  manifestation  by  writ  of 
subito  sumere.  atqne  e  regiis  manibns  the  justiciary,  there  are  several  statutes 
extorquere,  ne  qua  ipsi  contra  jus  vis  in-  in  the  Fueros  against  illegal  detention,  or 
feratur.  Non  quod  tunc  reus  judicio  unnecessary  severity  towards  prisoners 
liberetnr ;  nihilominus  tnmen,  ut  loqui-  (De  Custodia  reorum,  f.  163.)  No  judge 
mur,  de  meritis  causae  ad  plenum  cog-  could  proceed  secretly  in  a  criminal  pro- 
noscitur.  Sed  quod  deinceps  manifesto  cess  ;  an  indispensable  safeguard  to  pub- 
teneatur,  quasi  an  tea  celatus  extitisset ;  lie  liberty,  and  one  of  the  most  salutary, 
necesseque  deiude  sit  de  ipsius  culpa,  as  well  as  most  ancient,  provisions  in  our 
non  impetu  et  cum  furore,  sed  sedatis  own  constitution.  (De  judiciis  )  Tor- 
prorsus  animis,  et  juxta  constitutas  leges  ture  was  abolished,  except  in  cases  of 
judicari.  Ex  eo  autem,  quod  hujusmodi  coining  false  money,  and  then  only  in 
judicium  manifesto  deprehensum,  omni-  respect  of  vagabonds.  (General  Privi- 
bus  jam   patere   debeat.  Manifestationis  lege  of  1283.) 

eibi  nomen  airipuit.     p.  675.  Zurita  has  explained  the  two  processes 

Ipsius    Manifestationis    potestas     tarn  of  jurisfirma  and  manifestation  so  per- 

solida  est   et   repentina,  ut  homini  jam  spicuously,  that,  as  the  subject  is  very 

collum  in  laqueum  inserenti  subveniat.  interesting, and  rather  out  of  the  common 

Illius  enim  prtEsidio.  damnatus,  dum  per  way,  I  shall  both  quote  and  translate  tha 

leges  licet,  quasi  experiendi  juris  gratia,  passage.     Con  firmar  de  derecho,  que  ei 

de   manibus  judicum    confestim    extor-  dar  caution  a  estara  justicia,  seconseden 

quetur,  et  in  carcerem  ducitur  ad  id  sedi-  literas    inhibitorias    por    el   justicia    de 

ficatum,  ibidemque   asservatur  tamdiu,  Aragon,  para  que  no  puedan  sur  presos, 

quamdiu  jurene.  an  injuria,  quid  in  ea  ni  privados,  ni  despojados  de  su  posses- 

causa   factum   fuerit,  judicatur.     Prop  sion,  hasta  que  judicialmente  se  couozca, 

terea  career  hie  vulgari  lingua,  la  carce".  y  declare  sobre  la  pretension,  y  justicia  de 

ie  lo8  manife8tados  nuncupatur.    p.  751.  las  partes,  y  parezca  por  processo  legitime), 

Fueros  de  Aragon,  fol    60      De  Mani-  que   se   deve   revocar   la   tal    iuhibitiou 


532  PROCESSES   OF  Chap.  IV 

writ  (if  I  may  apply  our  terra)  was  such,  as  he  elsewhere  as- 
serts, that  it  would  rescue  a  man  whose  neck  was  in  the  hal- 
ter. A  particular  prison  was  allotted  to  those  detained  for 
trial  under  this  process. 

Several  proofs  that  such  admirable  provisions  did  not  re- 
lustanoes  uiain  a  dead  letter  in  the  law  of  Aragon  appear 
of  their  in   the  two  historians,  Blancas  and  Zurita,  whose 

app  ica  ion.  noDie  attachment  to  liberties,  of  which  they  had 
either  witnessed  or  might  foretell  the  extinction,  continually 
displays  itself.  I  cannot  help  illustrating  this  subject  by  two 
remarkable  instances.  The  heir  apparent  of  the  kingdom  of 
Aragon  had  a  constitutional  right  to  the  lieutenancy  or  re- 
gency during  the  sovereign's  absence  from  the  realm.  The 
title  and  office  indeed  were  permanent,  though  the  functions 
must  of  course  have  been  superseded  during  the  personal  ex- 
ercise of  royal  authority.  But  as  neither  Catalonia  nor  Va- 
lencia, which  often  demanded  the  king's  presence,  were  con- 
sidered as  parts  of  the  kingdom,  there  were  pretty  frequent 
occasions  for  this  anticipated  reign  of  the  eldest  prince. 
Such  a  regulation  was  not  likely  to  diminish  the  mutual  and 
almost  inevitable  jealousies  between  kings  and  their  heirs 
apparent,  which  have  so  often  disturbed  the  tranquillity  of  a 
court  and  a  nation.  Peter  IV.  removed  his  eldest  son,  after- 
wards John  L,  from   the   lieutenancy  of  the   kingdom.     The 

Estafue  la  suprema  y  principal  autoridad  inhibiting  ail  persons  to  arrest  the  party, 
del  Justicia  de  Aragond  esde  que  este  or  deprive  him  of  his  possession,  until 
magistrado  tuvo  origen,  y  lo  que  llama  the  matter  shall  be  judicially  inquired 
manifestation;  porque  assi  como  la  firma  into,  and  it  shall  appear  that  such  inhi- 
de  derecho  por  privilegio  general  del  bition  ought  to  be  revoked.  This  pro- 
reyno  impide,  que  no  puede  niuguno  ser  cess  and  that  which  is  called  uianifesta- 
preso,  6  agraviado  contra  razon  y  jus-  tion  have  been  the  chief  powers  of  the 
ticia,  de  la  misma  manera  la  manifesta-  justiciary,  ever  since  the  commencement 
cion,  que  es  otro  privilegio,  y  remedia  of  that  magistracy.  And  as  the  firma  de 
muy  principal,  tiene  fuerca,  quaudo  al-  derecho  by  the  general  privilege  of  the 
guno  es  preso  sin  preceder  processo  le-  realm  secures  every  man  from  being  ar- 
gitiino,  6  quando  lo  prenden  de  hecho  sin  rested  or  molested  against  reason  and 
orden  de  justicia;  y  en  estos  casos  solo  justice,  so  the  manifestation,  which  is 
el  Justicia  de  Aragon,  quando  se  tiene  another  principal  and  remedial  right 
recurso  al  el,  se  interpone,  mauifestando  takes  place  when  any  one  is  actually  ar- 
il preso,  que  es  tomarlo  a  su  mano,  de  rested  without  lawful  process  ;  and  in 
poder  de  qualquiera  jucz,  aunque  sea  el  such  cases  only  the  Justiciary  of  Aragon, 
mas  supremo  ;  y  es  obligado  el  Justicia  when  recourse  is  had  t«  him.  interposes 
de  Aragon,  y  sus  lugartenientes  de  pro-  by  manifesting  the  person  arrested,  that 
veer  la  manifestacion  en  el  mismo  in-  is,  by  taking  him  into  his  own  hands,  out 
stante,  que  les  es  pedida  sin  preceder  of  the  power  of  any  judge,  however  high 
informacion  ;  y  basta  que  se  pida  por  in  authority  ;  and  this  manifestation  the 
qualquiere  persona  que  se  diga  procura-  justiciary,  or  his  deputies  in  his  absence, 
dor  del  que  quiere  que  lo  tengan  por  are  bound  to  issue  at  tbe  same  instant  it 
manifesto.  t.  ii.  fol.  386.  "  Upon  a  is  demanded,  without  further  inquiry; 
firma  de  derecho,  which  is  to  give  se-  aud  it  may  be  demanded  by  any  one  as 
«urity  for  abiding  the  decision  of  the  law,  attorney  of  the  party  requiring  to  be 
the  Justiciary  of  Aragon  issues   letters  manifested." 


Spain.  JURISFIRMA   A.ND  MANIFESTATION.  533 

prince  entered  into  a  firma  del  derecho  before  the  justiciary 
Dominic  de  Cerda,  who,  pronouncing  in  hi-  favor,  enjoined 
the  king  to  replace  his  son  in  the  lieutenancy  as  the  undoubt- 
ed right  of  the  eldest  born.  Peter  obeyed,  not  only  in  factj 
to  which,  as  Blancas  observes,  the  law  compelled  him,  but 
with  apparent  cheerfulness.1  There  are  indeed  no  private 
persons  who  have  so  strong  an  interest  in  maintaining  a  free 
constitution  and  the  civil  liberties  of  their  countrymen  as  the 
members  of  royal  families,  since  none  are  so  much  exposed, 
in  absolute  governments,  to  the  resentment  and  suspicion  of 
a  reigning  monarch. 

John  I.,  who  had  experienced  the  protection  of  law  in  his 
weakness,  had  afterwards  occasion  to  find  it  interposed  against 
his  power.  This  king  had  sent  some  citizens  of  Saragosa  to 
prison  without  form  of  law.  They  applied  to  Juan  de  Cerda, 
the  justiciary,  for  a  manifestation.  He  issued  his  writ  ac- 
cordingly;  nor,  says  Blancas,  could  he  do  otherwise  without- 
being  subject  to  a  heavy  fine.  The  king,  pretending  that  the 
justiciary  was  partial,  named  one  of  his  own  judges,  the 
vice-chancellor,  as  coadjutor.  This  raised  a  constitutional 
question,  whether,  on  suspicion  of  partiality,  a  coadjutor  to 
the  justiciary  could  be  appointed.  The  king  sent  a  private 
order  to  the  justiciary  not  to  proceed  to  sentence  upon  this 
interlocutory  point  until  he  should  receive  instructions  in  the 
council,  to  which  he  was  directed  to  repair.  But  he  instantly 
pronounced  sentence  in  favor  of  his  exclusive  jurisdiction 
without  a  coadjutor.  He  then  repaired  to  the  palace.  Here 
the  vice-chancellor,  in  a  long  harangue,  enjoined  him  to  sus- 
pend sentence  till  he  had  heard  the  decision  of  the  council. 
Juan  de  Cerda  answered  that,  the  case  being  clear,  he  had 
already  pronounced  upon  it.  This  produeed  some  expres- 
sions of  anger  from  the  king,  who  began  to  enter  into  an  ar- 
gument on  the  merits  of  the  question.  But  the  justiciary 
answered  that,  with  all  deference  to  his  majesty,  he  was  bound 
to  defend  his  conduct  before  the  cortes,  and  not  elsewhere. 
On  a  subsequent  day  the  king,  having  drawn  the  justiciary  to 
his  country  palace  on  pretence  of  hunting,  renewed  the  con- 
versation with  the  assistance  of  his  ally  the  vice-chancellor  ; 
but  no  impression  was  made  on  the  venerable  magistrate, 
whom  John  at  length,  though  much  pressed  by  his  advisers 
to  violent  courses,  dismissed  with  civility.     The  king  wm 

i  Zurita,  ubi  supra.     Blancas,  p.  673. 


534  RESPONSIBILITY   OF  JUSTICIARY.  Chap.  IV 

probably  misled  throughout  this  transaction,  which  I  have 
thought  fit  to  draw  from  obscurity,  not  only  in  order  to  il- 
lustrate the  privilege  of  manifestation,  but  as  exhibiting  an 
instance  of  judicial  firmness  and  integrity,  to  which,  in  the 
fourteenth  century,  no  country  perhaps  in  Europe  could  offer 
a  parallel.1 

Before  the  cortes  of  1348  it  seems  as  if  the  justiciary 
Office  of  might  have  been  displaced  at  the  king's  pleasure, 
justiciary  From  that  time  he  held  his  station  for  life.  But 
held  for  hfe.  «n  or(](,r  \0  evade  this  law,  the  king  sometimes  ex- 
acted a  promise  to  resign  upon  request.  Ximenes  Cerdan, 
the  justiciary  in  1420,  having  refused  to  fulfil  this  engage- 
ment, Alfonso  V.  gave  notice  to  all  his  subjects  not  to  obey 
him,  and,  notwithstanding  the  alarm  which  this  encroachment 
created,  eventually  succeeded  in  compelling  him  to  quit  his 
office.  In  1439  Alfonso  insisted  with  still  greater  severity 
upon  the  execution  of  a  promise  to  resign  made  by  another 
justiciary,  detaining  him  in  prison  until  his  death.  But  the 
cortes  of  1442  proposed  a  law,  to  which  the  king  reluctantly 
acceded,  that  the  justiciary  should  not  be  compellable  to  re- 
sign his  office  on  account  of  any  previous  engagement  he 
might  have  made.2 

But  lest  these  high  powers,  imparted  for  the  prevention 
of  abuses,  should  themselves  be  abused,  the  iu<ti- 

Responsi-  ....  n  .        ° 

bmty  of  this  ciary  was  responsible,  in  case  or  an  unjust  sen- 
magistrate.  tence?  t0  t]ie  extent  of  the  injury  inflicted ; 3  and 
was  also  subjected,  by  a  statute  of  1390,  to  a  court  of  inqui- 
ry, composed  of  four  persons  chosen  by  the  king  out  of  eight 
named  by  the  cortes  ;  whose  office  appears  to  have  been  that 
of  examining  and  reporting  to  the  four  estates  in  cortes,  by 
whom  he  wa<  ultimately  to  be  acquitted  or  condemned.  This 
superintendence  of  the  cortes,  however,  being  thought  dilato- 
ry and  inconvenient,  a  court  of  seventeen  persons  wa<  ap- 
pointed in  1461  to  hear  complaints  against  the  justiciary. 
Some  alterations  were  afterward-  made  in  this  tribunal.* 
The  justiciary  was  always  a  knight,  chosen   from  the  second 

i  Biancse  Commentar.  ubi  supra.     Zu-  tiza  of  Aragon  had  possessed  mnch  more 

rita  relates  the  story,  but  not  so  fully.  unlimited  powers  than  ought  to  ae  in- 

2  Fueros  de  Aragon,  fol.  22 ;  Zurita.  t.  trusted   to   any  (tingle   magistrate.     The 

iii.  fol.  140,  255,272;  Eiauc.   Comment.  Court  of  King's   Bench  io  England,  be- 

p.  701.  aides  its  consisting   of   four  coordinate 

a  Fueros  de  Aragon,  fol.  25.  jndgi  -.  is  i  hecki  I  i>..  tin-  appell&ntjuris- 

4  Blaneas;  Zurita.  t.  iii.  fol.  321 ;  t.  iv.  dictions  "!'  the  Bxche   aer  Chamber  and 

f.   103.     These  regulations  were  very  ae-  House  of  Lords,  and   still    more   impor 

eeptable  to  the  nation.     In  fief,  fix-  jus-  tantly  bj  the  rights  of  juries. 


Spain.  RIGHTS   OF  LEGISLATION,   ETC  535 

order  of  nobility,  the  barons  not  being  liable  to  personal  pun- 
ishment.     He  administered  the  coronation  oath  to  the  kin<r 
and   in  the  cortes  of  Aragon  the  justiciary  acted   as  a  sort  of 
royal  commissioner,  opening  or  proroguing   the  assembly  by 
the  king's  direction. 

No  laws  could  be  enacted  or  repealed,  nor  any  tax  impos- 
ed, without  the  consent  of  the  estates  duly  assem-  Rightsof 
bled.1  Even  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Peter  II.,  in  !fs|slation 
LZvo,  that  prince  having  attempted  to  impose  a  taxation, 
general  tallage,  the  nobility  and  commons  united  for  the  pres- 
ervation of  their  franchises  ;  and  the  tax  was  afterwards 
granted  in  pari  by  the  cortes.2  It  may  easily  be  supposed 
that  the  Aragoncse  were  not  behind  other  nations  in  statutes 
to  secure  these  privileges,  which  upon  the  whole  appear  to 
have  been  more  respected  than  in  any  other  monarchy.3 
The  general  privilege  of  1283  formed  a  &ort  of  groundwork 
for  this  legislation,  like  the  Great  Charter  in  England.  By 
a  clause  in  this  law,  cortes  were  to  be  held  exevy  year  at 
Saragosa.  But  under  James  II.  their  time  of  meeting  was 
reduced  to  once  in  two  years,  and  the  place  was  left  to  the 
king's  discretion.4  Nor  were  the  cortes  of  Aragon  less  vigi- 
lant than  those  of  Castile  in  claiming  a  right  to  be  consulted 
in  all  important  deliberations  of  the  executive  power,  or  in 
remonstrating  against  abuses  of  government,  or  in  superin- 
tending the  proper  expenditure  of  public  money.5     A  van- 

1  Majores    nostri,    quae    de     omnibus  t.  ii.  f.  168  and  382.     Blaneas   mentiors 

statueuda  esse ut,  noluerunt  juberi.  veta-  that  Alfonso  V.  net   a   tallage  upon   his 

rive    posse,    nisi   vocatis.    descriptisque  towns  for  the    marriage  of  his  natural 

ordinibus,   ac    cunctis   eoruin    adhibitis  daughters,  which    he   might  have    done 

suffragiis,  re  ipsa  cognita  et  promulgate,  had  they  been  legitimate;  but  they  ap- 

Dnde  perpetuum  illud  nobis  com  para  turn  pealed  to  the  justiciary's  tribunal,  and 

est  jus,  ut  communes  et  publicae  leges  the  king  receded  from  his  demand,  p.  701. 
neque   tolli,   neque    rogari    possint,  nisi         Some  instances  of  tyrannical  conduct 

priusuniversuspopulus  una  voce  eomitiis  in   violation   of  the   constitutional  laws 

institutis  suuin  ea  de  re  liberum  suffra-  occur,  as  will  naturally  be  supposed,  in 

giuni   ferat;    idque   postea    ipsius    regis  the  annals  of  Zurita.     The  execution  of 

assensu  comprobetur.     Bianca?,  p.  761.  Bernard  Cabrera  under  Peter  IV.,  t   ii 

3  Zurita,  t.  i.  fol.  92.  f.    336,   and   the   severities    inflicted   on 

3  Fueros  de    Aragon:    Quod  sissae  in  queen  Porcia  by  her  son-in-law  John  I.. 

Aragonia  removeantur.  (a.d.  1372.)  De  f.  391,  are  perhaps  as  remarkable  as  any! 
prohibitione  sissarum.    (1398.)     T)e  jon-        «  Zurita,   t.   i.  f.  426.     In  general   the 

servatione  patrimonii.      (1461.)     I   have  session  lasted  from  four  to  six  months, 

only  remarked  two  instances  of  arbitrary  One  assembly  was   prorogued    from  time 

taxation  in    Zurita's  history,   which   is  to  time,  and  continued  six   years,  from 

singularly  full  of  information;  one,  in  1446  to  1452,  which  was  complained  of  as 

1343,    when  Peter    IV.   collected    money  a  violation  of  the  law  for   their  biennial 

from  various  cities,  though  not  without  renewal,    t.  iv.  f.  6. 

opposition;  and  the  other  a  remonstrance  ''The  Sicilian  war  of  Peter  III.  was 
if  thecortes  in  1383  against  heavy  taxes;  very  unpopular,  because  it  had  been  inl- 
and it  is  uot  clear  that  this  refers  to  dertaken  without  consent  of  the  barons 
feueral   unauthorized  taxation      Zurita,  contrary  to  the  practice  of  the  kingdom 


536 


CORTES   OF  ARAGON.  Chap.  IV 


ety  of  provisions,  intended  to  secure  these  parliamentary 
privileges  and  the  civil  liberties  of  the  subject,  will  be  found 
dispersed  in  the  collection  of  Aragonese  laws,  1  which 
may  be  favorably  compared  with  those  of  our  own  statute- 
book. 

Four  estates,  or,  as  they  were  called,  arms  (brazos),  form- 
cortesof  ed  the  cortes  of  Aragon  —  the  prelates  and  com- 
Amgon.  manders  of  military  orders,  who  passed  for  eccle- 
siastics ; 2  the  barons  or  ricoshombres ;  the  equestrian  order 
or  infanzones,  and  the  deputies  of  royal  towns.8  The  two 
former  had  a  right  of  appearing  by  proxy.  There  was  no 
representation  of  the  infanzones,  or  lower  nobility.  But  it 
must  be  remembered  that  they  were  not  numerous,  nor  was 
the  kingdom  large.  Thirty-five  are  reckoned  by  Zurita  as 
present  in  the  cortes  of  1395,  and  thirty-three  in  those  of 
1412 ;  and  as  upon  both  occasions  an  oath  of  fealty  to  a  new 
monarch  was  to  be  taken,  I  presume  that  nearly  all  the  no- 
bility of  the  kingdom  were  present.4  The  ricoshombres  do 
not  seem  to  have  exceeded  twelve  or  fourteen  in  number. 
The  ecclesiastical  estate  was  not  much,  if  at  all,  more  numer- 
ous. A  few  principal  towns  alone  sent  deputies  to  the  cortes ; 
but  their  representation  was  very  full ;  eight  or  ten,  and 
sometimes  more,  sat  for  Saragosa,  and  no  towrn  appears  to 
have  had  less  than  four  representatives.  During  the  interval 
of  the  cortes  a  permanent  commission,  varying  a  good  deal 
as  to  numbers,  but  chosen  out  of  the  four  estates,  was  em- 
powered  to  sit  with  very  considerable  authority,  receiving 

porque   ningun   negocio  arduo  euipren-  summoned  a  los  perlados,  ricoshombres, 

clian,  sin  acuerdo  y  consejo  de  sus  ricos-  y  cavalleros,  y  procuradores  de  las  ciu- 

hombres.     Zurita,    t.   i.    fol.   264.      The  dades  y  villas,  que  le  juntassen  a  cortes 

cortes,  he  tells  us.  were  usually  divided  generates  en  In  eiudad  de  Huesea.    Zurita, 

into  two  parties,  whiprs  and  tories  ;  estava  t.  i.  fol.  71.    So  in  the  cortes  of  1275,  and 

ordinariamente  dividida  en  dos  partas.  la  on  other  occasions. 

una  que   pensava  procurar  el  beneficio  3  Popular    representation    was     more 

del  reyno,  y  la  otra  que  el  servicio  del  ancient  in   Aragon    than    iu   any   other 

rey.     t.  iii.  fol.  321.  monarchy.    The  deputies    of  towns  ap 

i  Fueros  y   observancias  del  reyno  de  pear  in  the  cortes  of  1133.  as  Robertson 

Aragon.     2  vols,   in  fol.  Saragosa,  1667.  has  remarked    from    Zurita.      Hist,   of 

The  most  important  of  these  are  collected  Charles  V.    note   32.      And   this  cannot 

by  Blancas,  p.  750.  well   be  called  in  question,  or  treated  aa 

2  It  is  said  by  some  writers  that  the  an  anomaly ;  for  we  find  them  men- 
ecclesiastical  arm  was  not  added  to  the  tinned  in  1142  (the  passage  cited  in  th« 
cortes  of  Aragon  till  about  the  year  13<X>.  last  note).  and  again  in  1164,  when  Zu- 
But  1  do  not  find  mention  in  Zurita  of  rita  enumerates  many  of  their  names. 
any  such  constitutional  change  at  that  fol.  74.  The  institution  of  con^ejos.  or 
time  ;  and  the  prelates,  as  we  might  ex-  corporate  districts  under  a  presiding 
pect  from  the  analogy  of  other  countries,  town,  prevailed  in  Aragon  a«  it  did  in 
appear  as  members  of  the  national  conn-  Castile, 
cil  long  before.  Queen  Petronilla,  in  1142.  <  Zurita,  t.  ii.  f.  490  ;  t.  iii.  t  76 


Spain.  VALENCIA   AND   CATALONIA.  537 

and  managing   the  public  revenue,  and  protecting  the  justi- 
ciary in  his  functions.1 

The  kingdom  of  Valencia,  and  principality  of  Catalonia, 
having  been  annexed  to  Aragon,  the  one  by  con- 
quest, the  other  by  marriage,  were  always  kept  of'v'aieuda 
distinct  from  it  in  their  laws  and  government.  andCata- 
Each  had  its  cortes,  composed  of  three  estates,  for 
the  division  of  the  nobility  into  two  orders  did  not  exist  in 
either  country.  The  Catalans  were  tenacious  of  their  an- 
cient usages,  and  averse  to  incorporation  with  any  other 
people  of  Spain.  Their  national  character  was  high-spirited 
and  independent ;  in  no  part  of  the  peninsula  did  the  terri- 
torial aristocracy  retain,  or  at  least  pretend  to,  such  extensive 
privileges,2  and  the  citizens  were  justly  proud  of  wealth  ac- 
quired by  industry,  and  of  renown  achieved  by  valor.  At 
the  accession  of  Ferdinand  L,  which  they  had  not  much  de- 
sired, the  Catalans  obliged  him  to  swear  three  times  succes- 
sively to  maintain  their  liberties,  before  they  would  take  the 
reciprocal  oath  of  allegiance.3  For  Valencia  it  seems  to  have 
been  a  politic  design  of  James  the  Conqueror  to  establish  a 
constitution  nearly  analogous  to  that  of  Aragon,  but  with 
such  limitations  as  he  should  impose,  taking  care  that  the 
nobles  of  the  two  kingdoms  should  not  acquire  strength  by 
union.  In  the  reigns  of  Peter  III.  and  Alfonso  III.,  one  of 
the  principal  objects  contended  for  by  the  barons  of  Aragon 
was  the  establishment  of  their  own  laws  in  Valencia ; 
to  which  the  kings  never  acceded.4  They  permitted,  how- 
ever, the  possessions  of  the  natives  of  Aragon  in  the  latter 
kingdom  to  be  governed  by  the  law  of  Aragon.6  These 
three  states,  Aragon,  Valencia,  and  Catalonia,  were  perpetu- 
ally united  by  a  law  of  Alfonso  III. ;  and  every  king  on  his 
accession  was  bound  to  swear  that  he  would  never  separate 
them.6  Sometimes  general  cortes  of  the  kingdoms  and  prin- 
cipality were  convened  ;  but  the  members  did  not,  even  in 
this  case,  sit  together,  and  were  no  otherwise  united  than  as 
they  met  in  the  same  city.7 

1  Biancae,   p.  762  ;  Zurita,  t.  iii.  f.  76,  originally  a  justiciary  in  the  kingdom  of 

f.  182  et  alibi.  Valencia,  f.  281 ;  but  this,  I  believe,  did 

-  Zurita,  t.  ii.  f.  360.    The  villenage  of  not  long  continue. 

the  peasantry   in  some  parts  of   Cata-  5  Zurita,  t.  ii.  f.  433. 

Ionia  was  very  severe,  even  near  the  end  c  t.  ii.  f.  91. 

of  the  fifteenth  century      t.  iv.  f.  327-  7  Biancse,   Comment,    p    760;   Zurita, 

s  Zurita,  t.  iii.  f.  81.  t   iii  M   239 

<  Id  t.  i.  f.  281,  310,  333.     There  was 


538  UNION  OF  CASTILE  AND  AKAGON.        Chap.  IV. 

I  do  not  mean  to  represent  the  actual  condition  of  society 
Btat<?  of  m  Aragon  as  equally  excellent  with  the  constitu- 

poiice.  tional  laws.     Relatively  to  other  monarchies,  as 

I  have  already  ohserved,  there  seem  to  have  been  fewer  ex- 
cesses of  the  royal  prerogative  in  that  kingdom.  But  the 
licentious  habits  of  a  feudal  aristocracy  prevailed  very  long. 
We  find  in  history  instances  of  private  war  between  the 
great  families,  so  as  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the  whole  nation, 
even  near  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century.1  The  right  of 
avenging  injuries  by  arms,  and  the  ceremony  of  diilidation, 
or  solemn  defiance  of  an  enemy,  are  preserved  by  the 
laws.  We  even  meet  with  the  ancient  barbarous  usage  of 
paying  a  composition  to  the  kindred  of  a  murdered  man.3 
The  citizens  of  Saragosa  were  sometimes  turbulent,  and  a 
refractory  nobleman  sometimes  defied  the  ministers  of  jus- 
tice. But  owing  to  the  remarkable  copiousness  of  the  prin- 
cipal Aragonese  historian,  we  find  more  frequent  details  of 
this  nature  than  in  the  scantier  annals  of  some  countries. 
The  internal  condition  of  society  was  certainly  far  from 
peaceable  in  other  parts  of  Europe. 

By  the  marriage  of  Ferdinand  with  Isabella,  and  by  the 
Union  of  death  of  John  II.,  in  1479,  the  two  ancient  and 
Castile  and  rival  kingdoms  of  Castile  and  Aragon  were  for- 
ever consolidated  in  the  monarchy  of  Spain. 
There  had  been  some  difficulty  in  adjusting  the  respective 
rights  of  the  husband  and  wife  over  Castile.  In  the  middle 
ages  it  was  customary  for  the  more  powerful  sex  to  exercise 
all  the  rights  which  it  derived  from  the  weaker,  as  much  in 
sovereignties  as  in  private  possessions.  But  the  Castilians 
were  determined  to  maintain  the  positive  and  distinct  pre- 
rogatives of  their  queen,  to  which  they  attached  the  indepen- 
dence of  their  nation.  A  compromise  therefore  was  con- 
cluded, by  which,  though,  according  to  our  notions,  Ferdinand 
obtained  more  than  a  due  share,  he  might  consider  himself 
as  more  strictly  limited  than  his  father  had  been  in  Navarre. 
The  names  of  both  were  to  appear  jointly  in  their  style  and 
upon  the  coin,  the  king's  taking  the  precedence  in  respect  of 
his  sex.  But  in  the  royal  scutcheon  the  arms  of  Castile 
were  preferred  on  account  of  the  kingdom's  dimity.  Isabella 
had  the  appointment  to  all  civil  offices  in  Castile  ;  the  nom- 

»  Zurita    t.  iv.  fol.  189  2  Fueros  de  Aragon,  f.  1660   &o 


Spain.  CONQUEST   OF   GRANADA.  539 

ination  to  spiritual  benefices  ran  in  the  name  of  both.  The 
government  was  to  be  conducted  by  the  two  conjointly  when 
they  were  together,  or  by  either  singly  in  the  province  where 
one  or  other  might  happen  to  reside.1  This  partition  was 
well  preserved  throughout  the  life  of  Isabel  without  mutual 
encroachments  or  jealousies.  So  rare  an  unanimity  between 
persons  thus  circumstanced  must  be  attributed  to  the  superior 
qualities  of  that  princess,  who,  while  she  maintained  a  con- 
stant good  understanding  with  a  very  ambitious  husband, 
never  relaxed  in  the  exercise  of  her  paternal  authority  over 
the  kingdoms  of  her  ancestors. 

Ferdinand  and  Isabella  had  no  sooner  quenched  the  flames 
of  civil  discord  in  Castile  than  they  determined  to  conquest  of 
give  an  unequivocal  proof  to  Europe  of  the  vigor  GraQada- 
which  the  Spanish  monarchy  was  to  display  under  their  gov- 
ernment. For  many  years  an  armistice  with  the  Moors  of 
Granada  had  been  uninterrupted.  Neither  John  II.  nor 
Henry  IV.  had  been  at  leisure  to  think  of  aggressive  hostili- 
ties ;  and  the  Moors  themselves,  a  prey,  like  their  Christian 
enemies, -to  civil  war  and  the  feuds  of  their  royal  family,  were 
content  with  the  unmolested  enjoyment  of  the  finest  province 
in  the  peninsula.  If  we  may  trust  historians,  the  sovereigns 
of  Granada  were  generally  usurpers  and  tyrants.  Bat  I 
know  not  how  to  account  for  that  vast  populousness,  that 
grandeur  and  magnificence,  which  distinguished  the  Monarn- 
medan  kingdom  of  Spain,  without  ascribing  some  measure  of 
wisdom  and  beneficence  to  their  governments.  These  south- 
ern provinces  have  dwindled  in  later  times  ;  and  in  fact  Spain 
itself  is  chiefly  interesting  to  many  travellers  for  the  monu- 
ments which  a  foreign  and  odious  race  of  conquerors  have  left 
behind  them.  Granada  was,  however,  disturbed  by  a  series 
of  revolutions  about  the  time  of  Ferdinand's  accession,  which 
naturally  encouraged  his  designs.  The  Moors,  contrary  to 
what  might  have  been  expected  from  their  relative  strength, 
were  the  aggressors  by  attacking  a  town  in  Andalusia.2  Pred- 
atory inroads  of  this  nature  had  hitherto  been  only  retaliated 
by  the  Christians.  But  Ferdinand  was  conscious  that  his 
resources  extended  to  the  conquest  of  Granada,  the  consum- 
mation of  a  struggle  protracted  through  nearly  eight  centuries. 
Even  in  the  last  stage  of  the  Moorish  dominion,  exposed  01/ 

1  Zurita,  t.  iv.  fol.  224  ;  Mariana,  1.  xxiv.  c.  6  2  Zurita,  t.  iv   fol.  314 


540  CONQUEST  OF  GRANADA  Chap.  IV 

every  side  to  invasion,  enfeebled  by  civil  dissension  that  led 
one  party  to  abet  the  common  enemy,  Granada  was  not  sub- 
dued without  ten  years  of  sanguinary  and  unremitting  contest. 
Fertile  beyond  all  the  rest  of  Spain,  that  kingdom  contained 
seventy  walled  towns  ;  and  the  capital  is  said,  almost  two  cen- 
turies before,  to  have  been  peopled  by  200,000  inhabitants.1 
Its  resistance  to  such  a  force  as  that  of  Ferdinand  is  perhaps 
the  best  justification  of  the  apparent  negligence  of  earlier 
monarchs.  But  Granada  was  ultimately  to  undergo  the  yoke. 
The  city  surrendered  on  the  2nd  of  January  1492  —  an  event 
glorious  not  only  to  Spain  but  to  Christendom  —  and  which, 
in  the  political  combat  of  the  two  religions,  seemed  almost 
to  counterbalance  the  loss  of  Constantinople.  It  raised 
the  name  of  Ferdinand  and  of  the  new  monarchy  which 
he  governed  to  high  estimation  throughout  Europe.  Spain 
appeared  an  equal  competitor  with  France  in  the  lists  of 
ambition.  These  great  kingdoms  had  for  some  time  felt  the 
jealous}'  natural  to  emulous  neighbors.  The  house  of  Aragon 
loudly  complained  of  the  treacherous  policy  of  Louis  XL 
He  had  fomented  the  troubles  of  Castile,  and  given,  not  indeed 
an  effectual  aid,  but  all  promises  of  support,  to  the  princess 
Joanna,  the  competitor  of  Isabel.  Rousillon,  a  province  be- 
longing to  Aragon,  had  been  pledged  to  France  by  John  II. 
for  a  sum  of  money.  It  would  be  tedious  to  relate  the  sub- 
sequent events,  or  to  discuss  their  respective  claims  to  its 
possession.'2  At  the  accession  of  Ferdinand,  Louis  XL  still 
held  Rousillon,  and  showed  little  intention  to  resign  it.  But 
Charles  VIIL,  eager  to  smooth  every  impediment  to  his 
Italian  expedition,  restored  the  province  to  Ferdinand  in 
1493.  Whether  by  such  a  sacrifice  he  was  able  to  lull  the 
king  of  Aragon  into  acquiescence,  while  he  dethroned  his 
relation  at  Naples,  and  alarmed  for  a  moment  all  Italy  with 
the  apprehension  of  French  dominion,  it  is  not  within  the 
limits  of  the  present  work  to  inquire. 

t  Zurita,  t.  iv.  fol.  314.  is  the  most  impartial  French   writer   I 

*  For  these  transactions  see  Gamier,  have  ever  read,  in  matters  where  his  own 

Ilist.  de  France,  or  Gaillard,  Rivalite  de  county  is  concerned. 

Prance  et  d'Espagne,   t.  iii.    The  latter 


Koto  to  Chap.  IV.        COUNT  JULI4N.  541 


NOTE  TO   CHAPTER  IV 


Note.     Page  486. 


The  story  of  Cava,  daughter  of  count  Juliai.,  whose  se- 
duction by  Roderic,  the  last  Gothic  king,  impelled  her  father 
to  invite  the  Moors  into  Spain,  enters  largely  into  the  cycle 
of  Castilian  romance  and  into  the  grave  narratives  of  every 
historian.     It  cannot,  however,  be  traced  in  extant  writings 
higher   than  the   eleventh  century,  when   it  appears  in  the 
Chronicle  of  the  Monk  of  Silos.     There  are  Spanish  histori- 
ans of  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries  ;  in  the  former,  Isidore 
bishop  of  Beja  (Pacensis),  who  wrote  a  chronicle  of  Spain  , 
in  the  latter,  Pauius  Diaconus  of  Merida,  Sebastian  of  Sala- 
manca, and  an  anonymous  chronicler.'    It  does  not  appear, 
however,  that  these  dwell  much  on  Roderick   reign.      (See 
Masdeu,  Historia  Critica  de  Espana,  vol.  xiii.  p.  882.)     The 
most  critical  investigators  of  history,  therefore,  have  treated 
the  story  as  too  apocryphal  to  be  stated  as  a  fact.    A  sensible 
writer  in  the  History  of  Spain  and  Portugal,  published  by 
the  Society  for  the  Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge,  has  de 
fended  its    probability,  quoting  a  passage  from    Fen-eras,  a 
Spanish  writer  of  the   eighteenth   century,  whose  authority 
stands  high,  and  who  argues  in  favor  of  the  tradition  from 
the  brevity  of  the  old  chroniclers  who  relate  the  fall  of  Spain, 
and  from  the  want  of  likelihood  that  Julian,  who  had  hitherto 
defended  his  country  with  great  valor,  would  have  invited  the 
Saracens,  except  through  some  strong  motives.     This,  if  we 
are  satisfied  as  to  the  last  fact,  appears  plausible  ;  but  another 
hypothesis  has    been  suggested,  and  is  even  mentioned   by 
one  of  the  early  writers,  that  Julian,  being  of  Roman  descent, 
was  ill-affected  to  the  Gothic  dynasty,  who  had  never  attached 
to   themselves   the  native    inhabitants.     This   T    cannot   but 
reckon  the  less  likely  explanation  of  the  two.     Roderic,  who 
became  archbishop  of  Toledo  in   1208,  and  our  earliest  au- 


542  COUNT  JULIAN  iMote  ic 

thority  after  the  monk  of  Silo?,  calls  Julian  u  vir  nobilis  de 
nobili  Gothorum  prosapia  ortus,  illustris  in  officio  Palatino, 
in  armis  exercitatus,"  &c  (See  Schottus,  Hispania  Illustrata, 
ii.  63.)  Few,  however,  of  those  who  deny  the  truth  of  the 
story  as  it  relates  to  Cava  admit  the  defection  of  count  Julian 
to  the  Moors,  and  his  existence  lias  been  doubted.  The  two 
parts  of  the  story  cohere  together,  and  we  have  no  better 
evidence  for  one  than  for  the  other. 

Southey,  in  his  notes  to  the  poem  of  Roderic,  says,  "  The 
best  Spanish  historians  and  antiquaries  are  persuaded  that 
there  is  no  cause  for  disbelieving  the  uniform  and  concurrent 
tradition  of  both  Moors  and  Christians"  But  this  is  on  the 
usual  assumption,  that  those  are  the  best  who  agree  best  with 
ourselves.  Southey  took  generally  the  credulous  side,  and 
his  critical  judgment  is  of  no  superlative  value.  Masdeu,  in 
learning  and  laboriousness  the  first  Spanish  antiquary,  calls 
the  story  of  Julian's  daughter  "  a  ridiculous  tale,  framed  in 
the  age  of  romance,  when  histories  were  thrust  aside  (arrin- 
conadas)  and  any  love-tale  was  preferred  to  the  most  serious 
truth."  (Hist.  Crit.  de  Espana,  vol.  x.  p.  223.)  And  when, 
in  another  passage  (vol.  xii.  p.  6),  he  recounts  the  story  at 
large,  he  says  that  the*  silence  of  all  writers  before  the  monk 
of  Silos  "  should  be  sufficient  in  my  opinion  to  expel  from  our 
history  a  romance  so  destitute  of  foundation,  which  the  Ara- 
bian romancers  doubtless  invented  for  their  ballad-." 

A  modern  writer  of  extensive  learning  says,  "  This  fable, 
which  has  found  its  way  into  most  of  the  sober  histories  of 
Spain,  was  first  introduced  by  the  monk  of  Silos,  a  chronicler 
of  the  eleventh  century.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  bor- 
rowed it  from  the  Arabs,  but  it  seems  hard  to  believe  that  it 
was  altogether  a  tale  of  their  invention.  There  are  facts  in  it 
which  an  Arab  could  not  have  invented,  unless  he  drew  them 
from  Christian  sources ;  and,  as  I  shall  show  hereafter,  the 
Arabs  knew  and  consulted  the  writings  of  the  Christians." 
(Gayangos,  History  of  the  Mohammedan  Dynasties  of  Spain, 
vol.  i.  p.  513.)  It  does  not  appear  to  be  a  conclusion  from 
this  passage  that  the  story  is  a  fable.  For  if  a  chronicler  of 
the  eleventh  century  borrowed  it  from  the  Arabs,  and  they 
again  from  Christian  sources,  wre  get  over  a  good  deal  of  the 
chasm  of  time.  But  if  writers  antecedent  to  the  monk  of 
Silos  have  related  the  Arabian  invasion  and  the  fall  of  Rod- 
eric  without  alluding  to  so  important  a  point  as  the  treachery 


Chap.  IV.  COUNT  JULIAN.  543 

of  a  great  Gothic  noble,  it  seems  difficult  to  resist  the  infer- 
ence from  their  silence. 

Gayangos  investigates  in  a  learned  note  (vol.  i.  p.  537)  the 
following  points  :  —  By  whom  and  when  was  the  name  of 
Ilyan,  the  Arabic  form  of  Julian,  first  introduced  into  Spanish 
history  ?  Did  such  a  man  ever  exist  ?  What  were  his  coun- 
try and  religion?  Was  he  an  independent  prince, or  a  tribu- 
tary to  the  Gothic  monarchs  ?  What  part  did  he  take  in  the 
«onquest  of  Spain  by  the  Arabs  ? 

The  account  of  Julian  in  the  Chronicon  Silense  appears  to 
Gayangos  indisputably  borrowed  from  some  Arabian  author- 
ity;  and  this  he  proves  by  several  writers  from  the  ninth 
century  downwards,  "  all  of  whom  mention,  more  or  less  ex- 
plicitly, the  existence  of  a  man  living  in  Africa,  and  named 
Ilyan,  who  helped  the  Arabs  to  make  a  conquest  of  Spain ;  to 
which  I  ought  to  add  that  the  rape  of  Ilyan's  daughter,  and 
the  circumstances  attending  it,  may  also  be  read  in  detail  in 
the  Mohammedan  authors  who  preceded  the  monk  of  Silos." 
The  result  of  this  learned  writer's  investigation  is,  that  Ilyan 
really  existed,  that  he  was  a  Christian  chief,  settled,  not  in 
Spain,  but  on  the  African  coast,  and  that  he  betrayed,  not  his 
country  (except  indeed  as  he  was  probably  of  Spanish  de- 
scent), but  the  interests  of  his  religion,  by  assisting  the  Sara- 
cens to  subjugate  the  Gothic  kingdom.1 

The  story  of  Cava  is  not  absolutely  overthrown  by  this 
hypothesis,  though  it  certainly  may  be  the  invention  of  some 
Christian  or  Arabian  romancer.  It  is  perfectly  true  that  of 
itself  it  contains  no  apparent  improbability.  Injuries  have 
been  thus  inflicted  by  kings,  and  thus  resented  by  subject  . 
But  for  this  very  reason  it  was  likely  to  be  invented ;  and  the 
unwillingness  with  which  many  seem  to  surrender  so  romantic 
a  tale  attests  the  probability  of  its  obtaining  currency  in  an 
uncritical  period.  We  must  reject  it  as  false  or  not,  according 
as  we  lay  stress  on  the  negative  argument  from  the  silence,  of 
very  early  writers  (an  argument,  strong  even  as  it  is,  and 
which  would  be  insuperable  if  they  were  less  brief  and  im- 

1  The  Arabian  writer  whom  Gayantros  residence  of  Julian  on  that  side  of  the 

translates,   one  of   late  date,   speaks  of  straits  would   not  be  incompatible  with 

ilyan  as  governor  of  Oeuta,  but  tells  the  his  being   truly   a   Spaniard.      Ilyan  is 

<tory  of  Cava  in  the  usual  manner.    The  evidently  not  an  European  form  of  the 

3oths  may  very  probably  have  possessed  name, 
•ome  of  the  African  coast;  so   that  the 


544  COUNT  JULIAN.  Note  to  Chat.  IV. 

perfect)  and  on  the  presumptions  adduced  by  Gayangos  that 
Julian  was  not  a  noble  Spaniard ;  but  we  cannot  receive  this 
celebrated  legend  at  any  rate  with  more  than  a  very  sceptical 
assent,  not  sufficient  to  warrant  us  in  placing  it  among  tha 
authentic  fact*  of  history. 


Germany.  SEPARATION   FROM   FRANCE.  545 


CHAPTER    V. 

HISTORY    OF    GERMANY    TO    THE    DIET    OF    WORMS   IN  1495 

Sketch  of  German  History  under  the  Emperors  of  the  House  of  Saxony  —  House 
of  Franconia  — Henry  TV.  — House  of  Suabia— Frederic  Barbarossa  —  Fall  of 
Henrv  the  Lion  —  Frederic  II.  —  Extinction  of  House  of  Suabia  —  Changes  iu 
the  Germanic   Constitution  —  Electors  —  Territorial  Sovereignty  of  the   Princes 

—  Rodolph  of  Hapsburg  —  State  of  the  Empire  after  his  Time  —  Causes  of 
Decline  of  Imperial  Power  —  House  of  Luxemburg  —  Charles  IV. —  Golden 
Bull — House   of    Austria  —  Frederic    III. —Imperial   Cities  —  Provincial   States 

—  Maximilian  —  Diet  of  Worms  —  Abolition  of  Private  Wars  —  Imperial  Chamber 

—  Aulic  Council  —  Bohemia  —  Hungary  —  l^vitzerland. 

After  the  deposition  of  Charles  the  Fat  in  888,  which 
finally  severed  the  connection  between  France  and  Germany,1 
Arnulf,  an  illegitimate  descendant  of  Charlemagne,  obtained 
the  throne  of  the  latter  country,  in  which  he  was  Separation 
succeeded  by  his  son  Louis.2  But  upon  the  death  of  Germany 
of  this  prince  in  911,  the  German  branch  of  that 
dynasty  became  extinct.  There  remained  indeed  Charles 
the  Simple,  acknowledged  as  king  in  some  parts  of  France, 
but  rejected  in  others,  and  possessing  no  personal  claims  to 
respect.  The  Germans  therefore  wisely  determined  to  choose 
a  sovereign  from  among  themselves.  They  were  at  this  time 
divided  into  five  nations,  each  under  its  own  duke,  and  distin- 
guished by  difference  of  laws,  as  well  as  of  origin  ;  the  Franks 
whose  territory,  comprising  Franconia  and  the  modern  Pala- 
tinate, was  considered  as  the  cradle  of  the  empire,  and  who 
seem  to  have  arrogated  some  superiority  over  the  rest,  the 
Suabians,  the  Bavarians,  the  Saxons,  under  which  name  the 

i  There  can  be  no  question  about  this  dependence  of  the  crown  in  that  age, 
in  a  general  sense.  But  several  German  which  had  been  established  by  the  treaty 
writers  of  the  time  assert  that  both  of  Verdun  in  843,  but  proves  the  weak- 
Eudes  and  Charles  the  Simple,  rival  uess  of  the  competitors,  and  their  want 
kings  of  France,  acknowledged  the  feudal  of  patriotism.  Iu  Eudes  it  is  more  re- 
superiority  of  Arnulf.  Charles,  says  Re-  markable  than  in  Charles  the  Simple,  a 
gino,  regnum  quod  usurpaverit  ex  manu  man  of  feeble  character,  and  a  Carlovin- 
ejus   percepit.      Sfruvius,   Corpus   Hist,  gian  by  birth. 

German,  p.  202.  203  This  acknowledg-  -  The  German  princes  had  some  hesita- 
ment  of  sovereignty  in  Arnulf  king  of  tion  about  the  choice  of  Louis,  but  their 
Germany,  who  did  not  even  pretend  to  partiality  to  the  Carlovingian  line  pre- 
be  emperor,  by  both  the  claimants  of  vailed.  Struvius,  p.  208 :  quia  reges 
(he  throne  of  France,  for  such  it  virtually  Francorum  semper  ex  uno  genere  pro- 
was,  though  they  do  not  appear  to  have  cedebant,  says  an  archbishop  Hatto,  in 
rendered  homage,  caunot  affect  the  in-  writing  to  the  pope 
VOL.  I.  — M.                        35 


54G  HOUSE  OF  SAXONY.  Cfap.  V. 

inhabitants  of  Lower  Saxony  alone  and  Westphalia  were  in- 
cluded, and  the  Lorrainers,  who  occupied  the  left  bank  of  the 
Election  of  Rhine  as  far  as  its  termination.  The  choice  01 
Conrad.  these  nations  in  their  general  assembly  fell  upon 

Conrad,  duke  of  Franconia,  according  to  some 
writers,  or  at  least  a  man  of  high  rank,  and  descended  through 
females  from  Charlemagne.1 

Conrad  dying  without  male  issue,  the  crown  of  Germany 
House  of  was  bestowed  upon  Henry  the  Fowler,  duke  of 
Saxony,  ancestor  of  the  three  Othos,  who  followed 
Henry  the  him  in  direct  succession.  To  Henry,  and  to  the 
a°d!oi9.  first  Otho,  Germany  was  more  indebted  than  to 
°th°936  anJr  sovere'gn  since  Charlemagne.  The  conquest 
otho  ii."  of  Italy,  and  recover}-  of  the  imperial  title,  are  in- 
otho9iii.  deed  tne  most  brilliant  trophies  of  Otho  the  Great ; 
a.d.983.  but  he  conferred  far  more  unequivocal  benefits 
upon  his  own  country  by  completing  what  his  father  had 
besrun,  her  liberation  from  the  inroads  of  the  Hungarians. 
Two  marches,  that  of  Misnia,  erected  by  Henry  the  Fowler, 
and  that  of  Austria,  by  Otho,  were  added  to  the  Germanic 
territories  by  their  victories.2 

A  lineal  succession  of  four  descents  "without  the  least 
opposition  seems  to  show  that  the  Germans  were  disposed 
to  consider  their  monarchy  as  fixed  in  the  Saxon  family. 
Otho  II.  and  III.  had  been  chosen  each  in  his  father's  life- 
time, and  during  legal  infancy.  The  formality  of  election 
subsisted  at  that  time  in  every  European  kingdom  ;  and  the 
imperfect  rights  of  birth  required  a  ratification  by  public 
assent.  If  at  least  France  and  England  were  hereditary 
monarchies  in  the  tenth  century,  the  same  may  surely  be 
said  of  Germany ;  since  we  find  the  lineal  succession  fully 
as  well  observed  in  the  last  as  in  the  former.  But  upon  the 
early  and  unexpected  decease  of  Otho  III.,  a  momentary  op- 
Henry  n.  position  was  offered  to  Henry  duke  of  Bavaria,  a 
a  d.  1002.       eollateral  branch  of  the  reigning  family.      He  ob- 

1  Schmidt,  Hist,  des  Allemands,  t.  ii.  dency  to  promote  the  improvement  of 
p.  288.  Struvius,  Corpus  Historic  Ger-  that  territory,  and,  combined  with  the 
manicjB,  p.  210.  The  former  of  these  discovery  of  the  gold  and  silver  mine? 
writers  does  not  consider  Conrad  as  duke  of  Goslar  under  Otho  I.,  rendered  it  the 
of  Franconia.  richest    and    most    important     part   of 

2  Many  towns  in  Germany,  especially  the  empire.  Struvius,  p.  22o  and  251. 
on  the  Saxon  frontier,  were  built  by  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  322.  Putter,  Historical 
Henry  I.,  who  is  said  to  have  compelled  Development  >f  the  German  Constitu- 
every  ninth  man  to  take  up  his  residence  tion,  vol.  i.  p   116. 

In  them.    This  had  a  remarkable   ten- 


Germany.  HOUSE  OF  FRANCONIA.  547 

fcained  the  crown,  however,  by  what  contemporary  historians 
call  an  hereditary  title,1  and  it  was  not  until  his  death  in 
1024  that  the  house  of  Saxony  was  deemed  to  be  extin- 
guished. 

No  person  had  now  any  pretensions  that  could  interfere 
with  the  unbiassed  suffrages  of  the  nation  ;   and  „ 

Ji.OU.S6  Ot 

accordingly  a  general    assembly  was    determined  i-ranconia. 
by  merit  to  elect   Conrad,  surnamed  the   Salic,  a  Conradn 
nobleman  of  Franconia.2    From  this  prince  sprang  a.d.  1024. 
three  successive  emperors,  Henry  III.,  IV.,  and  a.d"Yo39.  ' 
V.     Perhaps  the  imperial  prerogatives  over  that  KenrZl? 
insubordinate  confederacy  never  reached  so  high  a  Henry  v. 
point  as  in  the  reign  of  Henry  III.,  the  second  em-  A-D- 1106- 
peror  of  the  house  of  Franconia.     It  had  been,  as  was  natural, 
the  object  of  all  his  predecessors,  not  only  to  render  their 
throne  hereditary,  which,  in  effect,  the  nation  was  willing  to 
concede,  but  to  surround  it  with  authority  sufficient  to  control 
the   leading  vassals.      These  were  the  dukes  of  the   four 
nations  of  Germany,  Saxony,  Bavaria,  Suabia,  and  Franco- 
nia, and  the  three  archbishops  of  the  Rhenish  cities,  Mentz, 
Treves,  and  Cologne.      Originally,  as  has  been   more  fully 
shown  in  another  place,  duchies,  like  counties,  were  temporary 
governments,  bestowed  at  the  pleasure  of  the  crown.     From 
this  first  stage  they  advanced  to  hereditary  offices,  and  finally 
to  patrimonial  fiefs.     But  their  progress  was  much  slower  in 
Germany  than  in  France.     Under  the  Saxon  line  of  empe- 
rors, it  appears   probable   that,  although   it  was   usual,  and 
consonant   to   the   prevailing   notions  of  equity,  to  confer  a 
duchy  upon  the  nearest  heir,  yet  no  positive  rule  enforced 
this  upon   the   emperor,  and   some   instances  of  a  contrary 
proceeding  occurred.3     But,  if  the  royal  prerogative  in  this 
respect  stood  higher  than  in  France,  there  was  a  counter- 
vailing principle  that  prohibited  the  emperor  from  uniting  a 
fief  to  his  domain,  or  even  retaining  one  which  he  had  pos- 
sessed before  his  accession.     Thus  Otho  the  Great  granted 

1  A  maxim!  multitudine  vox  una  re-  3  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  393.  403.  Struvius, 
spondit;  Henricum,  Christi  adjutorio,  et  p.  214,  supposes  the  hereditary  rights  of 
jure  hsereditario,  regnaturum.  Ditmar  dukes  to  have  commenced  under  Conrad 
apnd  Struvium,  p.  273.  See  other  pas-  T. ;  but  Schmidt  is  perhaps  a  better  au- 
sages  quoted  in  the  same  place.  Schmidt,  thority  ;  ;ind  Struvius  afterwards  nien- 
t.  ii.  p.  410.  tions  the  refusal  of  Otho  1.  to  grant  the 

2  Conrad  was  descended  from  a  daugh-  duchy  of  Ravaria  to  the  sons  of  the  last 
ter  of  Otho  the  Great,  and  also  from  duke,  which,  however,  excited  a  »<»bel 
Conrad  I.     His  first-cousin  was  duke  of  lion.  p.  235. 

Franconia.     Struvius  ;  Schmidt ;  Pfeffel. 


548  HOUSE  OF   FRANCONIA.  Chap    V 

away  his  duchy  of  Saxony,  and  Henry  II.  that  of  Bavaria 
Otho  the  Great  endeavored  to  counteract  the  effects  of  this 
custom  by  conferring  the  duchies  that  fell  into  his  hands 
upon  members  of  his  own  family.  This  policy,  though  appar- 
ently well  conceived,  proved  of  no  advantage  to  Otho,  his 
son  and  brother  having  mixed  in  several  rebellions  again. -t 
him.  It  was  revived,  however,  by  Conrad  II.  and  Henry 
III.  The  latter  was  invested  by  his  father  with  the  two 
duchies  of  Suabia  and  Bavaria.  Upon  his  own  accession 
he  retained  the  former  for  six  years,  and  even  the  latter  for 
a  short  time.  The  duchy  of  Franconia,  which  became  va- 
cant, he  did  not  regrant,  but  endeavored  to  set  a  precedent 
of  uniting  fiefs  to  the  domain.  At  another  time,  after  sen- 
tence of  forfeiture  against  the  duke  of  Bavaria,  he  bestowed 
that  great  province  on  his  wife,  the  empress  Agnes.1  He 
put  an  end  altogether  to  the  form  of  popular  concurrence, 
which  had  been  usual  when  the  investiture  of  a  duchy  was 
conferred ;  and  even  deposed  dukes  by  the  sentence  of  a  few 
princes,  without  the  consent  of  the  diet.2  If  we  combine 
with  these  proofs  of  authority  in  the  domestic  administration 
of  Henry  III.  his  almost  unlimited  control  over  papal  elec- 
tions, or  rather  the  right  of  nomination  that  he  acquired,  we 
must  consider  him  as  the  most  absolute  monarch  in  the 
annals  of    Germany. 

These  ambitious  measures  of  Henry  III.  prepared  fifty 
Unfortunate  years  °f  calamity  for  his  son.  It  is  easy  to  per- 
reign  of  ceive  that  the  misfortunes  of  Henry  IV.  were 
enry  '  primarily  occasioned  by  the  jealousy  with  which 
repeated  violations  of  their  constitutional  usages  had  inspired 
the  nobility.3  The  mere  circumstance  of  Henry  IV.'s  mi- 
nority, under. the  guardianship  of  a  woman,  was  enough  to 
dissipate  whatever  power  his  father  had  acquired.  Hanno, 
archbishop  of  Mentz,  carried  the  young  king  away  by  force 
from  his  mother,  and  governed  Germany  in  his  name  ;  till 
another  archbishop,  Adalbert  of  Bremen,  obtained  greater 
influence  over  him.  Through  the  neglect  of  his  education, 
Henry  grew  up  with  a  character  not  well  fitted  to  retrieve 
the   mischief  of  so   unprotected  a  minority ;   brave   indeeu 

1  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  p.  25,  37-  of  Aschaffenburg  to  have  formed  a  con- 

2  Id.  p.  207.  spiracy  to  depose  him,  out  of  resentment 
*  In    the  very   first    year  of  Henry's    for  the  injuries  they  had  sustained  from 

r^ign,  while  he  was  but  six  years  old,  the  his  father.  Struvius,  p.  306.  St.  Marc, 
t  ~inc.es  of  Saxony  are  said  by  Lambert    t.  iii.  p.  248. 


Gekmany.  HOUSE  OF  FRANCONIA.  549 

well-natured,  and  affable,  but  dissolute  beyond  measure,  and 

addicted  to  low  and  debauched  company.     He  was        ,rt„0 
it*  i  -Tin  AD-  !0/3. 

soon  involved  in  a  desperate  war  with  the  Saxons, 

a  nation  valuing  itself  on  its  populousness  and  riches,  jealous 
of  the  house  of  Franconia,  who  wore  a  crown  that  had 
belonged  to  their  own  dukes,  and  indignant  at  Henry's  con- 
duct in  erecting  fortresses  throughout  their  country. 

In  the  progress  of  this  war  many  of  the  chief  princes 
evinced  an  unwillingness  to  support  the  emperor.1  Not- 
withstanding this,  it  would  probably  have  terminated,  as 
other  vebellions  had  done,  with  no  permanent  loss  to  either 
part}".  But  in  the  middle  of  this  contest  another  far  more 
memorable  broke  out  with  the  Roman  see,  concerning  eccle- 
siastical investitures.  The  motives  of  this  famous  quarrel 
will  be  explained  in  a  different  chapter  of  the  present  work. 
Its  effect  in  Germany  was  ruinous  to  Henry.  A  A  D  1077 
sentence,  not  only  of  excommunication,  but  of 
deposition,  which  Gregory  VII.  pronounced  against  him, 
gave  a  pretence  to  all  his  enemies,  secret  as  well  as  avowed, 
to  withdraw  their  allegiance.2  At  the  head  of  these  was 
Rodolph  duke  of  Suabia,  whom  an  assembly  of  revolted 
princes  raised  to  the  throne.  We  may  perceive,  in  the  con- 
ditions of  Rodolph's  election,  a  symptom  of  the  real  principle 
that  animated  the  German  aristocracy  against  Henry  IV.  It 
was  agreed  that  the  kingdom  should  no  longer  be  hereditary, 
not  conferred  on  the  son  of  a  reigning  monarch,  unless  his 
merit  should  challenge  the  popular  approbation.8  The  pope 
strongly  encouraged  this  plan  of  rendering  the  empire  elec- 
tive, by  which  he  hoped  either  eventually  to  secure  the 
nomination  of  its  chief  for  the  Holy  See,  or  at  least,  by 
sowing  the  seed  of  civil  dissensions  in  Germany,  to  render 

1  Struviua.     Schmidt.  manifests  great  dissatisfaction  with    the 

-  A   party   had  been   already   formed,  court  of  Rome,  which  he  reproaches  with 

who   were  meditating   to  depose  Henry,  dissimulation  and  venality. 

His  excommunication  came  just  in  time  3  Hoc   etiam    ihi   consensu    communi 

to  confirm  their  resolutions.     It  appears  comprobatum,    liomani    pontificis    auc- 

clearly,    upon   a   little  consideration    of  toritate  est  corroboratum,  ut  regia  po- 

•  Henry  IV. 's  reign,  that  the  ecclesiastical  testas  nulli  per  haereditatem,  sicut  antea 

quarrel  was  only  secondary  in  the  eyes  fuit  consuetude,  cederet,  sed  Alius  regis, 

of  Germany.     The  contest  against  him  etiamsi  valde  dignus  esset,  per  electionem 

was  a  struggle  of  the  aristocracy,  jealous  spontaneam,  uon  per  successions  tineam, 

of  the  imperial  prerogatives  which  Con-  rex  proveniret :  si  vero  non  esset  dignus 

rad  II.  and  Henry  III.  had  strained   to  regis  filius.  vel  si  nollet  eum  populus, 

the  utmost.     Those  who  were  in  rebellion  queni    regem   facere   vellet,   haberet    ic 

against    Henry  were    not    pleased  with  potestate  populus.    Bruno  de  Bello  Sax 

Grsgory  VII.    Bruno,  author  of  a  histo-  onico,  apud  Struvium,  p.  327. 
•v  rf  the  Saxon  war.  a  furious  invective. 


550  ELECTION   OF  LOTHAIRE.  Caw    V. 

Italy  more  independent.  Henry  IV.,  however,  displayed 
greater  abilities  in  his  adversity  than  his  early  eonduct  had 
promised.  In  the  last  of  several  deeisive  battles,  Rodolph, 
though  victorious,  was  mortally  wounded;  and  no 
one  cared  to  take  up  a  gauntlet  which  was  to  be  woo 
with  so  much  trouble  and  uncertainty.  The  Germans  were 
sufficiently  disposed  to  submit ;  but  Rome  persevered  in  her 
unrelenting  hatred.  At  the  close  of  Henry's  long  reign  she 
excited  against  him  his  eldest  son,  and,  after  more  than  thirty 
years  of  hostility,  had  the  satisfaction  of  wearing  him  down 
with  misfortune,  and  casting  out  his  body,  as  excommunicated, 
from  its  sepulchre. 

In  the  reign  of  his  son  Henry  V.  there  is  no  event  worthy 
Extinction  of  °f  mucn  attention,  except  the  termination  of  the 
the  house  of   great  contest  about  investitures.     At  his  death  in 

Franconia.        u^     ^     m^Q     j^    of    ^     JTranconian    emper- 

ors  was  at  an  end.  Frederic  duke  of  Suabia,  grandson  by 
his  mother  of  Henry  IV.,  had  inherited  their  pat- 
rimonial estates,  and  seemed  to  represent  their 
dynasty.  But  both  the  last  emperors  had  so  many  enemies, 
and  a  disposition  to  render  the  crown  elective  prevailed  so 
Election  of  strongly  among  the  leading  princes,  that  Lothaire 
Lothaire.  duke  of  Saxony  was  elevated  to  the  throne,  though 
rather  in  a  tumultuous  and  irregular  manner.1  Lothaire,  wTho 
had  been  engaged  in  a  revolt  against  Henry  V.,  and  the  chief 
of  a  nation  that  bore  an  inveterate  hatred  to  the  house  of 
Franconia,  was  the  natural  enemy  of  the  new  family  that 
derived  its  importance  and  pretensions  from  that  stock.  It 
was  the  object  of  hi^  reign,  accordingly,  to  oppress  the  two 
brothers,  Frederic  and  Conrad,  of  the  Hohenstauffen  or 
Suabian  family.  By  this  means  he  expected  to  secure  the 
succession  of  the  empire  for  his  son-in-law.  Henry,  sur- 
named  the  Proud,  who  married  Lothaire's  only  child,  was 
fourth  in  descent  from  Welf,  son  of  Azon  marquis  of  Est;-, 
by  Cunegonda,  heiress  of  a  distinguished  family,  the  Welfs 
of  Altorf  in  Suabia.     Her  son  was  invested  with  the  duchy 

i  See  an  account  of  Lothaire's  election  fundamental  principle  of  the  Germanic 

oy  a  contemporary  writer  in    Struvius,  constitution  from   the  accession  of  Lo- 

p.  357.     See  also  proofs  of  the  dissatis-  thaire.      Previously    to   that   era,    birth 

faction  of  the  aristocracy  at  the  Franco-  seems  to  have  given  not  only  a  fair  title 

nian    government.      Schmidt,    t.   iii.   p.  to   preference,    but    a  sort    of   inchoate 

328.    It  was  evidently  their  determination  right,  as  in  France,  Spain,  and  England 

to  render  the  empire  truly  elective  (Id.  Lothaire  signed  a  capitulatiou  at  his  ac- 

V  335):  and  perhaps  we  may  date  that  cession 


Germany.  HOUSE  OF  SUABIA.  551 

of  Bavaria  in  1071.  His  descendant,  Henry  the  Proud, 
represented  al-o,  through  his  mother,  the  ancient  dukes  of 
Saxony,  surnamed  Billung,  from  whom  he  derived  the  duchy 
of  Luneburg.  The  wife  of  Lothaire  transmitted  to  her 
daughter  the  patrimony  of  Henry  the  Fowler,  consisting  of 
Hanover  and  Brunswic.  Besides  this  great  dowry,  Lothaire 
bestowed  upon  his  son-in-law  the  duchy  of  Saxony  in  addi- 
tion to  that  of  Bavaria.1 

This  amazing  preponderance,  however,  tended  to  alienate 
the  princes  of  Germany  from  Lothaire's  views  in  favor  of 
Henry ;  and  the  latter  does  not  seem  to  have  possessed  abili- 
ties adequate  to  his  eminent   station.     On  the  death  of  Lo- 
thaire in  1138  the  partisans  of  the  house  of  Suabia  made  a 
hasty  and  irregular  election  of  Conrad,  in  which  the   Saxon 
faction  found  itself  obliged  to  acquiesce.2     The  new  emperor 
availed  himself  of  the  jealousy  which  Henry  the  House  of 
Proud's  aggrandizement  had  excited.     Under  pre-  Suabia. 
tence  that  two  duchies  could  not  legally  be  held  by 
the  same  person,  Henry  was  summoned  to  resign  AD  1138 
one  of  them ;  and  on  his  refusal,  the  diet  pronounced  that  he 
had  incurred  a  forfeiture   of  both.     Henry  made  but  little 
resistance,  and  before  his  death,  which  happened  soon  after 
wards,  saw  himself  stripped  of  all  his  hereditary  as  well  as 
acquired    possessions.      Upon    this    occasion    the  0 
famous  names  of  Guelf  and  Ghibelin  were  first  Gueifsand 
heard,  which  were  destined  to  keep  alive  the  flame  Ghlbelms- 
of  civil   dissension   in  far   distant    countries,  and  after  their 
meaning  had  been  forgotten.    The  Guelfs,  or  Welfs,  were,  as 
I  have  said,  the  ancestors  of  Henry,  and  the  name  has  be- 
come a  sort  of  patronymic  in  his  family.    The  word  Ghibelin 
is  derived  from  Wibelung,  a  town  in  Franconia,  whence  the 
emperors  of  that  line  are  said  to  have  sprung.     The  house 
of  Suabia  were  considered  in  Germany  as  representing  that 
of  Franconia ;  as  the  Guelfs  may,  without  much  impropriety, 
he  deemed  to  represent  the  Saxon  line.3 

Though  Conrad  III.  left  a  son,  the  choice  of  the  electors 
fell,  at  his  own  request,  upon  his  nephew  Frederic  Frederic 
Barbarossa.4    The  most  conspicuous  events  of  this  Barharossa 
great  emperor's  life  belong  to  the  history  of  Italj       At  horn  a 

i   Pfeffel,    Abrege    Chronologique    de  2  Schmidt. 

l'Histoire  d'Allemagne,  t.  i.  p.  269.    (Pa-  3  Struvius,  p   370  and  878. 

ris,   1777.)    Gibbon's  Antiquities  of  the  *  Struvius. 
House  of  Brunswic 


552  HOUSE  OF  SUABIA  Chap.  V. 

he  was  feared  and  respected ;  the  imperial  prerogatives  stood 
as  high  during  his  reign  as,  after  their  previous  decline,  it 
was  possible  for  a  single  man  to  carry  them.1  But  the  only 
circumstance  which  appears  memorable  enough  for  the  pres- 
Faii  of  ent  sketch  is  the  second  fall  of  the  Guelfs.    Henry 

iienry  the      the  Lion,  son  of  Henry  the  Proud,  had  been  re- 
stored by   Conrad  III.  to  his    father's    duchy  of 
a.d.  1178.       Saxony,  resigning   his  claim  to  that  of  Bavaria 
which  had  been  conferred  on  the  margrave  of  Austria.     This 
renunciation,  which  indeed  was  only  made  in  his  name  during 
childhood,  did   not   prevent  him  from    urging  the   emperor 
Frederic  to  restore  the  whole  of  his  birthright ;  and  Fred- 
eric; his  first-cousin,  whose  life  he  had  saved  in  a  sedition  at 
Rome,  was  induced  to  comply  with  this  request  in  1156.     Fai 
from  evincing  that  political  jealousy  which  some  writers  im 
pute  to  him,  the  emperor  seems  to  have  carried  his  generosit) 
beyond  the  limits  of  prudence.     For  many  years  their  unioi 
was  apparently  cordial.    But,  whether  it  was  that  Henry  took 
umbrage  at  part  of  Frederic's  conduct,2  or  that  mere  ambition 
rendered  him  ungrateful,  he  certainly  abandoned  his  sover- 
eign in  a  moment  of  distress,  refusing  to  give  any  assistance 
in  that  expedition  into  Lombardy  which  ended  in  the  unsuc- 
cessful battle  of  Legnano.     Frederic  could  not  forgive  this 
injury,  and,  taking  advantage  of  complaints,  which  Henry's 
power  and  haughtiness  had  produced,  summoned  him  to  an- 
swer charges  in  a  general  diet.    The  duke  refused  to  appear, 
and,  being  adjudged  contumacious,  a  sentence  of  confiscation, 
similar  to  that  which  ruined  his  father,  fell  upon  his  head  ; 
and  the  vast  imperial  fiefs   that  he  possessed  were   shared 
among  some  potent  enemies.3    He  made  an  ineffectual  resist- 
ance ;  like  his  father,  he  appears  to  have  owed  more  to  for- 
tune than  to  nature  ;  and  after  three  years'  exile,  was  obliged 
to  remain  content  with  the  restoration  of  his  alodial  estates 
in  Saxony.     These,  fifty  years  afterwards,   were  converted 
into  imperial  fiefs,  and  became  the  two  duchies  of  the  house 

1  Pfeffel,  p.  341.  ousy  of  the  Guelfs,  and  as  illegally  pro 

2  Frederic  had  obtained  the  succession  scribed  by  the  diet.  But  the  provocations 
of  Wolf  marquis  of  Tuscany,  uncle  of  he  had  given  Frederic  are  undeniable; 
Henry  the  Lion,  who  probably  considered  and,  without  pretending  to  decide  on  a 
himself  as  entitled  to  expect  it.  Schmidt,  question  of  German  history,  1  do  not  see 
p.  427.  that  there  was  any  precipitancy  or  mani 

'■'•  Putter,  in  his  Historical  Development  fest  breach   of  justice  in  the  course  of 

of  the  Constitution  of  the  German  Em-  proceedings  against  him.     Schmidt,  Pfirf 

fare,  is  inclined   to  consider   Henry  the  fel,  and   Struvius   do   not  represent  the 

jion  as  sacrificed  to  the  emperors  jeal-  condemnation  of  Henry  as  unjust. 


/Iermant.  HOUSE  OF  SUABIA  553 

of  Brunswic,  the  lineal  representatives  of  Henry  the  Lion^ 
and  inheritors  of  the  name  of  Guelf.1 

Notwithstanding  the  prevailing  spirit  of  the  German 
oligarchy,  Frederic  Barbarossa  had  found  no  difficulty  in 
procuring  the  election  of  his  son  Henry,  even' during  infancy, 
as  his  successor.2  The  fall  of  Henry  the  Lion  Henry  vi. 
had  greatly  weakened  the  ducal  authority  in  AD- 119°- 
Saxony  and  Bavaria  ;  the  princes  who  acquired  that  tide, 
especially  in  the  former  country,  finding  that  the  secular  and 
spiritual  nobility  of  the  first  class  had  taken  the  opportunity 
to  raise  themselves  into  an  immediate  dependence  upon  the 
empire.  Henry  VI.  came,  therefore,  to  the  crown  with  con- 
siderable advantages  in  respect  of  prerogative ;  and  these 
inspired  him  with  the  bold  scheme  of  declaring  the  empire 
hereditary.  One  is  more  surprised  to  find  that  he  had  no 
contemptible  prospect  of  success  in  this  attempt:  fifty-two 
princes,  and  even  what  appears  hardly  credible,  the  See  of 
Rome,  under  Clement  III.,  having  been  induced  to  concur  in 
it.  But  the  Saxons  made  so  vigorous  an  opposition,  that 
Henry  did  not  think  it  advisable  to  persevere.3  He  procured, 
however,  the  election  of  his  son  Frederic,  an  infant  only  two 
years  old.  But,  the  emperor  dying  almost  immediately,  a 
powerful  body  of  princes,  supported  by  Pope  Innocent  III., 
were  desirous  to  withdraw  their  consent.  Philip  phm  and 
duke  of  Suabia,  the  late  king's  brother,  unable  to  otho  rv. 
secure  his  nephew's  succession,  brought  about  his  A 
own  election  by  one  party,  while  another  chose  Otho  of 
Brunswic,  younger  son  of  Henry  the  Lion.  This  double 
election  renewed  the  rivalry  between  the  Guelfs  and  Ghibe- 
lms,  and  threw  Germany  into  confusion  for  several  years. 
Philip,  whose  pretensions  appear  to  be  the  more  legitimate 
of  the  two,  gained  ground  upon  his  adversary,  notwithstand- 
ing the  opposition  of  the  pope,  till  he  was  assassinated  in 
consequence  of  a  private  resentment.  Otho  IV.  reaped  the 
benefit  of  a  crime  in  which  he  did  not  participate,  and  became 
for  some  years  undisputed  sovereign.  But,  having  offended 
the  pope  by  not  entirely  abandoning  his  imperial  120g 
rights  over  Italy,  he  had,  in  the  latter  part  of  his 
reign,  to  contend  against  Frederic,  son  of  Henry  VI.,  who, 

1  Putter,  p.  220.  tern,  distincta  proximorum  successione, 

2  Struviu.s,  p.  418.  transiret,   et  Bic   in   ipso    terminus  esset 
8  Struvius.  p.  424.     ImpetraTit  a  sub-    eleetionis,  principiuiiHiue  successive  dig 

ditis,   at  cessante   pristini  Palatinorum    nitatis.     Grervas.  Tilburieus.  ibidem, 
electione,   iinperium  in  ipsius  posterita- 


554  RICHAKD  OF  CORNWALL.  Chai\  V 

having  grown  up  to  manhood,  came  into  Germany  as  heir  of 
the  house  of  Suabia,  and,  what  was  not  very  usual  in  his  own 
history,  or  that  of  his  family,  the  favored  candidate  of  the 
Holy  See.  Otho  IV.  had  been  almost  entirely  deserted  except 
by  his  natural  subjects,  when  his  death,  in  1218,  removed 
every  difficulty,  and  left  Frederic  II.  in  the  peaceable  posses- 
sion of  Germany.  * 

The  eventful  life  of   Frederic  II.  was   chiefly  passed  in 
.  Italy.     To  preserve  his  hereditary  dominions,  and 

chastise  the  Lombard  cities,  were  the  leading  ob- 
jects of  his  political  and  military  career.  He  paid  therefore 
but  little  attention  to  Germany,  from  which  it  was  in  vain 
for  any  emperor  to  expect  effectual  assistance  towards  objects 
of  his  own.  Careless  of  prerogatives  which  it  seemed  hardly 
worth  an  effort  to  preserve,  he  sanctioned  the  independence 
of  the  princes,  which  may  be  properly  dated  from  his  reign. 
In  return,  they  readily  elected  his  son  Henry  king  of  the 
Romans  ;  and  on  his  being  implicated  in  a  rebellion,  deposed 
him  with  equal  readiness,  and  substituted  his  brother  Conrad 
at  the  emperor's  request.1  But  in  the  latter  part  of  Fred- 
eric's reign  the  deadly  hatred  of  Rome  penetrated  beyond 
Conse-  *'ie  -Alps*    After  his  solemn  deposition  in  the  conn- 

quences  of      Cn  0f   Lyons,  he  was  incapable,   in  ecclesiastical 

the  council 

of  Lyons.        eyes,  of  holding   the  imperial  sceptre.     Innocent 

-jg.-        IV.  found,  however,  some  difficulty  in  setting  up  a 

rival   emperor.     Henry   landgrave   of    Thurinsria 

19AQ  J.  JO  *^ 

a.d.  14*8.  ma<-]e  an  indifferent  figure  in  this  character.  Upou 
his  death,  William  count  of  Holland  was  chosen  by  the  party 
adverse  to  Frederic  and  his  son  Conrad  ;  and  after  the  em- 
peror's death  he  had  some  success  against  the  latter.  It  is 
hard  indeed  to  say  that  any  one  was  actually  sovereign  foi 
twenty-two  years  that  followed  the  death  of  Frederic  II. : 
Grand  in-  a  period  of  contested  title  and  universal  anarchy, 
terregnum.     which  is  usually  denominated  the  grand  interreg- 

a  d  1250  •  • 

num.  On  the  decease  of  William  of  Holland,  in 
a  d.  1272.  1256,  a  schism  among  the  electors  produced  the 
Richard  of  double  choice  of  Richard  earl  of  Cornwall,  and 
Cornwall.  Alfonso  X.  king  of  Castile.  It  seems  not  easy  to 
determine  which  of  these  candidates  had  a  legal  majority  of 
votes ; 2  but  the  subsequent  recognition  of  almost  all  Germany, 

1  StruTius,  p.  467.  of  Treves,  having  got  possession  of  the 

2  The   election  ought   legally    to  have     town,  shut  out  the  archbishops  of  Ment? 
'.vieu  made  at  Frankfort.     But  the  elector    and  Cologne  and  the  count  palatine,  ou 


Germany.         '       GERMANIC  CONSTITUTION.  555 

and  a  sort  of  possession  evidenced  by  public  acts,  which  have 
been  held  valid,  as  well  as  the  general  consent  of  contem- 
poraries, may  justify  us  in  adding  Richard  to  the  imperial 
list.  The  choice  indeed  was  ridiculous,  as  he  possessed  no 
talents  which  could  compensate  for  his  want  of  power;  but 
the  electors  attained  their  objects ;  to  perpetuate  a  state  of 
confusion  by  which  their  own  independence  was  consolidated, 
and  to  plunder  without  scruple  a  man,  like  Didius  at  Rome, 
rich  and  foolish  enough  to  purchase  the  first  place  upon 
earth. 

That  place  indeed  was  now  become  a  mockery  of  great- 
ness.    For  more  than  two  centuries,  notwithstand- 
ing the  temporary  influence  of  Frederic  Barbarossa  Germanic*16 
and    his     son,   the    imperial    authority  had  been  coustitu- 
in  a  state  of   gradual  decay.     From  the  time  of 
Frederic  II.  it  had  bordered  upon  absolute   insignificance; 
and  the  more  prudent  German  princes  were  slow  to  canvass 
for  a  dignity  so  little  accompanied  by  respect.     The  changes 
wrought  in  (he  Germanic  constitution  during  the  period  of 
the  Suabian  emperors  chiefly  consist  in  the  establishment  of 
an  oligarch)'  of  electors,  and  of  the  territorial  sovereignty  of 
the  princes. 

1.  At  the  extinction  of  the  Franconian  line  by  the  death 
of  Henry  V.  it  was  determined  by  the  German 
nobility  to  make  their  empire  practically  elective, 
admitting  no  right,  or  even  natural  pretension,  in  the  eldest 
son  of  a  reigning  sovereign.  Their  choice  upon  former  oc- 
casions had  been  made  by  free  and  general  suffrage.  But  it 
may  be  presumed  that  each  nation  voted  unanimously,  and 
according  to  the  disposition  of  its  duke.  It  is  probable,  too, 
that  the  leaders,  after  discussing  in  previous  deliberations  the 
merits  of  the  several  candidates,  submitted  their  own  resolu- 
tions to  the  assembly,  which  would  generally  concur  in  them 
without  hesitation.     At  the  election  of  Lothaire,  in  1124,  we 

pretence  of  apprehending  violence.  They  Ottocar  had  voted  for  Alfonso,  and  that 

met  under  the  walls,  and  there  elected  he  did   not  think  fit  to  recognize  theii 

Richard.     Afterwards  Alfonso  was  chosen  act. 

by  the  votes  of  Treves,  Saxony,  and  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Richard 
Brandenburg.  Historians  differ  about  was  de  facto  sovereign  of  Germany  ;  and 
the  vote  of  Ottocar  king  of  Bohemia,  it  is  singular  that  Struvius  should  assert 
which  would  turn  the  scale.  Some  time  the  contrary,  on  the  authority  of  an  in- 
after  the  election  it  is  certain  that  he  strument  of  liodolph.  which  expressly 
was  on  the  side  of  Richard.  Perhaps  we  designates  him  king,  per  quondam 
may  collect  from  the  opposite  statements  Richardum  regetn  illustrem.  Struv.  p 
in  Struvius,  p.  504,  that  the  proxies  of  502. 


556  GERMANIC   CONSTITUTION.  Chap   V 

lind  an  evident  instance  of  this  previous  choice,  or,  as  it  was 
called,  prcetaxation,  from  which  the  electoral  college  of  Ger- 
many has  been  derived.  The  princes,  it  is  said,  trusted  the 
choice  of  an  emperor  to  ten  persons,  in  whose  judgment  they 
promised  to  acquiesce.1  This  precedent  was,  in  all  likeli- 
hood, followed  at  all  subsequent  elections.  The  proofs  indeed 
are  not  perfectly  clear.  But  in  the  famous  privilege  of 
Austria,  granted  by  Frederic  I.  in  1156,  he  bestows  a  rank 
upon  the  newly-created  duke  of  that  country,  immediately 
after  the  electing  princes  (post  principes  electores);'2  a  strong 
presumption  that  the  right  of  pretaxation  was  not  only  estab- 
lished, but  limited  to  a  few  definite  persons.  In  a  letter  of 
Innocent  III.,  concerning  the  double  election  of  Philip  and 
Otho  in  1198,  he  asserts  the  latter  to  have  had  a  majority  ic 
his  favor  of  those  to  whom  the  riglit  of  election  chiefly  be- 
longs (ad  quos  principaliter  spectat  electio).8  And  a  law  of 
Otho  in  1208,  if  it  be  genuine,  appears  to  fix  the  exclusive 
privilege  of  the  seven  electors.4  Nevertheless,  so  obscure  is 
this  important  part  of  the  Germanic  system,  that  we  find 
four  ecclesiastical  and  two  secular  princes  concurring  with 
the  regular  electors  in  the  act,  as  reported  by  a  contemporary 
writer,  that  creates  Conrad,  son  of  Frederic  II.,  king  of  the 
Romans.5  This,  however,  may  have  been  an  irregular  de- 
viation from  the  principle  already  established.  But  it  is 
admitted  that  all  the  princes  retained,  at  least  during  the 
twelfth  century,  their  consenting  suffrage ;  like  the  laity  in 
an  episcopal  election,  whose  approbation  continued  to  be 
necessary  long  after  the  real  power  of  choice  had  been 
withdrawn  from  them.6 

It  is  not  easy  to  account  for  all  the  circumstances  that 
gave  to  seven  spiritual  and  temporal  princes  this  distinguish- 
ed preeminence.  The  three  archbishops,  Mentz,  Treves,  and 
Cologne,  were  always  indeed  at  the  head  of  the  German 
church.  But  the  secular  electors  should  naturally  have  been 
the  dukes  of  four  nations :  Saxony,  Franconia,  Suabia,  and 
Bavaria.     We  find,  howrever,  only  the  first  of  these  in  the 

1  Struvius,   p.   357.      Schmidt,  t.   iii.     the  style  of  the  act  of  election  from  tin 
p.  331.  Chronicle  of  Francis  Pippin. 

2  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  p.  390.  c  This  is  manifest  by  the  various  pas- 

3  Pfeffel,  p.  360.  sages  relating  to  the  elections  of  Philip 

4  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  8C  and  Otho,  quoted   by  Struvius,   p.   428, 
6  This  is  not  mentioned  in  Struvius,  or    430.  See,  too,  Pfeffel,  ubi  supra.  Schmidt. 

the  other   Qermin  writers.     But  Denina     t.  iv.  p.  79. 
Rivoluzioui  d'lnlia,  1.  ix.  c.  9)  quotes 


Jerminy.  GERMANIC   CONSTITUTION.  >       557 

undisputed  exercise  of  a  vote.    It  seems  probable  that,  when 
the  electoral  princes  came  to  be  distinguished  from  the  rest, 
their  privilege  was  considered  as  peculiarly  connected  with 
the  discharge  of   one  of   the   great  offices   in   the   imperial 
court.     These  were  attached,  as  early  as  the  diet  of  Menlz 
in  1184,  to  the  four  electors,  who  ever  afterwards  possessed 
them :  the  duke   of  Saxony  having  then   officiated  as  arch- 
marshal,  the  count    palatine  of  the  Rhine  as  arch-steward, 
the  king  of  Bohemia  as  arch-cupbearer,  and  the  margrave 
of  Brandenburg  as  arch-chamberlain  of  the  empire.1     But 
it  still  continues  a  problem  why  the  three  latter  offices,  with 
the  electoral  capacity  as  their  incident,  should  not  rather  have 
been  granted  to  the  dukes  of  Franconia,  Suabia,  and  Bavaria. 
I  have  seen  no  adequate  explanation  of  this  circumstance ; 
which  may  perhaps  had  us  to  presume  that  the  right  of  pre- 
election was  not  quite  so  soon  confined  to  the  precise  number 
of  seven  princes.     The  final  extinction  of  two  great  original 
duchies,   Franconia   and   Suabia,  in  the   thirteenth   century, 
left  the  electoral  rights  of  the  count  palatine  and  the  mar- 
grave of  Brandenburg   beyond   dispute.     But  the  dukes  of 
Bavaria  continued  to  claim  a  vote  in  opposition  to  the  kings 
of  Bohemia.     At  the  election  of  Rodolph  in  1272   the  two 
brothers  of  the  house  of   Wittelsbach  voted  separately,  as 
count  palatine  and  duke  of  Lower  Bavaria.    Ottocar  was  ex- 
cluded upon  this  occasion;  and  it  was  not  till  1290  that  the 
suffrage  of  Bohemia  was  fully   recognized.      The   Palatine 
and  Bavarian  branches,   however,  continued  to  enjoy  their 
family  vote  conjointly,  by  a  determination  of  Rodolph  ;  upon 
which  Louis  of  Bavaria  slightly  innovated,  by  rendering  the 
suffrage  alternate.     But  the  Golden  Bull  of  Charles  I V.  put 
an  end  to  all  doubts  on  the  rights  of  electoral  houses,  and  ab- 
solutely excluded   Bavaria  from  voting.     The  limitation  to 
seven  electors,  first  perhaps  fixed  by  accident,  came  to  be  in- 
vested with  a  sort  of  mysterious  importance,  and  certainly 
was  considered,  until  times  comparatively  recent,  as  a  funda- 
mental law  of  the  empire.2 

2.  It  might  appear  natural  to  expect  that  an  oligarchy  o/ 
seven  persons,  who  had  thus  excluded  their  equals  Princes  and 

r  »  .  n  .  .  1  untitled  lti- 

from  all  share  in  the  election  ot  a  sovereign,  would  ferior  u0. 
assume  still  greater  authority,   and    trespass    fur-  biUfcy- 

l  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  78.  .  _, 

*  Ibid   r  78,  568  ;  Putter,  p.  274;  Pfeffel,  p.  435,  565  ;  Struvivs,  p.  511. 


558  GERMANIC   CONSTITUTION.  Chap.  V 

ther  upon  the  less  powerful  vassals  of  the  empire.  Bui 
while  the  electors  were  establishing  their  peculiar  privilege, 
the  class  immediately  inferior  raised  itself  by  important  acqui- 
sitions of  power.  The  German  dukes,  even  after  they  be- 
came hereditary,  did  not  succeed  in  compelling  the  chief  nobil- 
ity within  their  limits  to  hold  their  lands  in  fief  so  completely 
as  the  peers  of  France  had  done.  The  nobles  of  Suabia  re- 
fused to  follow  their  duke  into  the  field  against  the  emperor 
Conrad  II.1  Of  this  aristocracy  the  superior  class  were  de- 
nominated princes  ;  an  appellation  which,  after  the  eleventh 
century,  distinguished  them  from  the  untitled  nobility,  most  of 
whom  were  their  vassals.  They  were  constituent  parts  of  all 
diets ;  and  though  gradually  deprived  of  their  original  partici- 
pation in  electing  an  emperor,  possessed,  in  all  other  respects, 
the  same  rights  as  the  dukes  or  electors.  Some  of  them  were 
fully  equal  to  the  electors  in  birth  as  well  as  extent  of  domin- 
ions ;  such  as  the  princely  houses  of  Austria,  Hesse,  Brunswic, 
and  Misnia.  By  the  division  of  Henry  the  Lion's  vast  terri- 
tories,2 and  by  the  absolute  extinction  of  the  Suabian  family 
in  the  following  century,  a  great  many  princes  acquired  ad- 
ditional weight.  Of  the  ancient  duchies,  only  Saxony  and 
Bavaria  remained  ;  the  former  of  which  especially  was  so  dis- 
membered, that  it  was  vain  to  attempt  any  renewal  of  the 
ducal  jurisdiction.  That  of  the  emperor,  formerly  exercised 
by  the  counts  palatine,  went  almost  equally  into  disuse  during 
the  contest  between  Philip  and  Otho  IV.  The  princes  ac- 
cordingly had  acted  with  sovereign  independence  within  their 
own  fiefs  before  the  reign  of  Frederic  II. ;  but  the  legal  rec- 
ognition of  their  immunities  was  reserved  for  two  edicts  ot 
that  emperor  ;  one,  in  1220,  relating  to  ecclesiastical,  and  the 
other,  in  1232,  to  secular  princes.  By  these  he  engaged  nei- 
ther to  levy  the  customary  imperial  dues,  nor  to  permit  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  palatine  judges,  within  the  limits  of  a  state 
of  the  empire ; 3  concessions  that  amounted  to  little  less  than 
an  abdication  of  his  own  sovereignty.  From  this  epoch  the 
territorial  independence  of  the  states  may  be  dated. 

A  class  of  titled  nobility,  inferior  to  the  princes,  were  the 
counts  of  the  empire,  who  seem  to  have  been  separated  from 
the  former  in  the  twelfth  century,  and  to  have  lost  at.  the  same 

1  Pfeffel,  p.  209.  quite  a  new  face  to  Germany,  in  Pfeffel. 

2  See  the  arrangements  made  in  conse-     p.  234;  also  p.  437. 

ijuence  of  Henry's  forfeiture,  which  gave        :i  Pfeffel,  p.  384;  Putter,  p    233. 


Germany.  RODOLPH   OF   1IAPSBURG.  559 

time  their  right  of  voting  in  the  diets.1  In  some  parts  of 
Germany,  chiefly  in  Franconia  and  upon  the  Rhine,  there 
always  existed  a  very  numerous  body  of  lower  nobility;  unti- 
tled at  least  till  modern  times,  but  subject  to  no  superior  ex- 
cept the  emperor.  These  are  supposod  to  have  become  im- 
mediate, after  the  destruction  of  the  house  of  Suabia,  within 
whose  duchies  they  had  been  comprehended.'2 

A  short  interval  elapsed  after  the  death  of  Richard  of  Corn- 
wall before  the  electors  could  be  induced,  by  the         . 
deplorable  state  of  confusion  into  which  Germany  Rodoiph  of 
had  fallen,  to  fill  the  imperial  throne.     Their  choice  ^^gs- 
was  however  the  best  that  could  have  been  made. 
It  fell  upon  Rodoiph  count  of  Hapsburg,  a  prince  of  very  an- 
cient family,  and  of  considerable  possessions  as  well  in  Switz- 
erland as  upon   each  bank  of  the  Upper  Rhine,  but  not  suffi- 
ciently powerful  to  alarm  the  electoral  oligarchy.  Rodoiph  was 
brave,  active,  and  just;  but  his  characteristic  quality  appears 
to  have  been  good  sense,  and  judgment  of  the  circumstances 
in  which  he  was  placed.     Of  this  he  gave  a  signal  proof  in 
relinquishing   the  favorite  project  of  so  many  preceding  em- 
perors, and  leaving  Italy  altogether  to  itself.       At  borne  he 
manifested  a  vigilant  spirit  in  administering  justice,  and  is 
said  to  have  destroved  seventy  strongholds  of  noble  robbers  in 
Thuringia  and  other  parts,  bringing  many  of  the  criminals  to 
capital  punishment.3     But  he  wisely  avoided  giving  offence  to 
the  more  powerful  princes ;  and  during  his  reign  there  were 
hardly  any  rebellions  in  Germany. 

It  was  a  very  reasonable  object  of  every  emperor  to  ag- 
grandize his  family  by  investing  his  near  kindred  investment 
with  vacant  fiefs  ;  but  no  one  was  so  fortunate  in  f/Jiis/01?,, 

-r,  .  Albert  with 

nis  opportunities  as  Rodoiph.      At  his  accession,  duchy  of 
Austria,  Styria,  and  Carniola  were  in  the  hand-  of  Austna- 
Ottocar  king  of  Bohemia.     These  extensive  and  fertile  coun- 
tries  had  been  formed  into  a  march  or  margraviate,  after  the 
victories  of  Otho  the  Great  over  the   Hungarians.     Frederic 
Barbarossa  erected  them  into  a  duchy,  with  many  distinguish 
ed  privileges,  especially  that  of  female  succession,  hithert 

1  In   the  instruments   relating  to  the        "  Pfeffel,  p.  455;  Putter,  p.  254;  Stru 
election   of   Otho   IV.    the   princes   Bign     vius,  p.  511. 

their  names,  Ego  N.  elegi  et  subscripsi.  :  Struvius,  p.  530.  Ooxe's  Hist,  of 
But  the  counts  only  as  follows:  Ego  X.  House  of  Austria,  p.  57.  This  valuabll 
consensi  et  subscripsi.     Pfeflel,  p.  360.  work  contains  a  full  and  interesting  Ut 

count  of  Rodolph's  reign. 


nfiO 


THE  EMPIRE  AFTER    RODOLPH. 


Chap.  "V 


unknown  in   the   feudal   principalities  of  Germany.1      Upon 

the  extinction  of  the  house  of  Bamberg,  which  had  enjoyed 

this  duchy,  it  was  granted  l>y  Frederic  II.  to  a  cousin  of  his 

own  name;  after  whose  death  a  disputed  succession  gave  rise 

to  several  changes,  and  ultimately  enabled  Ottocar  to  gain 

possession  of  the  country.      Against  this  king  of  Bohemia 

1283        Rodolph  waged  two  successful  wars,  and  recovered 

the  Austrian  provinces,  which,  as   vacant  fiefs,  he 

conferred,  with  the  consent  of  the  diet,  upon  his  son  Albert.3 

Notwithstanding    the  merit   and    popularity  of   Rodolph, 

a.  .     . .,       the  electors  refused  to  choose  his  son  king  of  the 

State  of  the  ....  r»  •  -i 

empire  after  Romans  in  his  lifetime;  and,  after  his  death,  de- 
Kodoiph.  termined  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  hereditary 
succession,  put  Adolphus  of  Nassau  upon  the  throne.  There 
Adoiphus.  is  very  little  to  attract  notice  in  the  domestic  history 
of  the  empire  during  the  next  two  centuries.  From 
Adolphus  to  Sigismund  every  emperor  had  either  to 
struggle  against  a  competitor  claiming  the  majority 
of  votes  at  his  election,  or  against  a  combination 
of  the  electors  to  dethrone  him.  The  imperial 
authority  became  more  and  more  ineffective  ; 
yet  it  was  frequently  made  a  subject  of  reproach 
against  the  emperors  that  they  did  not  main- 
tain a  sovereignty  to  which  no  one  was  disposed  to 
submit. 

It  may  appear  surprising  that  the  Germanic  confederacy 
under  the  nominal  supremacy  of  an  emperor  should  have 
been  preserved  in  circumstances  apparently  so  calculated  to 
dissolve  it.  But.  besides  the  natural  effect  of  prejudice  and  a 
famous  name,  there  were  sufficient  reasons  to  induce  the  elec- 
tors to  preserve  a  form  of  government  in  which  they  bore  so 


a.d.  1292. 
Albert  I. 
a.d.  1298. 
Henrv  VII. 
a.d.  1308. 
Louis  IV. 
a.d.  1314. 
Charles  IV. 
a.d.  1347. 
Wenceslaus 
a.d.  1378. 
Robert. 
a.d.  1400. 
Sigismund. 
a.d.  1414. 


i  The  privileges  of  Austria  were  granted 
to  the  margrave  Henry  in  1156,  by  way 
of  indemnity  for  his  restitution  of  Bava- 
ria to  Henry  the  Lion.  The  territory 
between  the  Inn  and  the  Ems  was  sepa- 
rated from  the  latter  province,  and  an- 
nexed to  Austria  at  this  time.  The 
dukes  of  Austria  are  declared  equal  in 
rank  to  the  palatine  archdukes  (archi- 
ducibus  palatinis).  This  expression  gave 
a  hint  to  the  duke  Rodolph  IV.  to  as- 
sume the  title  of  archduke  of  Austria. 
Schmidt,  t.  in.  p.  390.  Frederic  II.  even 
created  the  duke  of  Austria  king :  a  very 
curious  fact  though  neither  he  nor  his 
successors  ever  assumed  the  title.     Stru- 


vius,  p.  463.  The  instrument  runs  as 
follows:  Ducatus  Austriae  et  Styriae, 
cum  pertineutiis  et  terra inis  suis  quot 
hactenus  habuit.  ad  nomen  et  honorem 
regium  transferentes,  te  hactenus  duca- 
tuum  prsedictorum  ducem,  de  potestatis 
nostras  plenitudine  et  magnificentiQ 
speciali  promovemus  in  regem,  per  liber- 
tates  et  jura  praedictuin  regnum  tuum 
praesentis  epigrammatis  auctoritate  do- 
nantes,  quae  regiam  deceant  dignitatem  ; 
ut  tamen  ex  honore  quern  tibi  libenter 
addimus.  nihil  honoris  et  juris  nostri 
diadematis  aut  imperii  subtrahatur. 
-  Struvius,  p.  525 ;  Schmidt  ;  Ooxe. 


Gkrmaitx.  CUSTOM   OF   PARTITION.  561 

decided  a  sway.  Accident  had  in  a  considerable  degree  re- 
stricted the  electoral  suffrages  to  seven  princes.  Without 
the  college  there  were  houses  more  substantially  powerful 
than  any  within  it.  The  duchy  of  Saxony  had  been  subdi- 
vided by  repeated  partitions  among  children,  till  the  electoral 
rio-ht  Avas  vested  in  a  prince  who  possessed  only  the  small 
territory  of  Wittenberg.  The  great  families  of  Austria,  Ba- 
varia, and  Luxemburg,  though  not  electoral,  were  the  real 
heads  of  the  German  body ;  and  though  the  two  former  lost 
much  of  their  influence  for  a  time  through  the  pernicious 
custom  of  partition,  the  empire  seldom  looked  for  its  head  to 
any  other  house  than  one  of  these  three. 

While  the  duchies  and  counties  of  Germany  retained  their 
original  character  of  offices  or  governments,  they  custom  of 
were  of  course,  even  though  considered  as  hered-  partition. 
itary,  not  subject  to  partition  among  children.  When  they 
acquired  the  nature  of  fiefs,  it  was  still  consonant  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  a  feudal  tenure  that  the  eldest  son  should  inherit 
according  to  the  law  of  primogeniture  ;  an  inferior  provision 
or  appanage,  at  most,  being  reserved  for  the  younger  children. 
The  law  of  England  favored  the  eldest  exclusively ;  that  of 
France  gave  him  great  advantages.  But  in  Germany  a  dif- 
ferent rule  began  to  prevail  about  the  thirteenth  century.1 
An  equal  partition  of  the  inheritance,  without  the  least  regard 
to  priority  of  birth,  was  the  general  law  of  its  principalities. 
Sometimes  this  was  effected  by  undivided  possession,  or  ten- 
ancy in  common,  the  brothers  residing  together,  and  reigning 
jointly.  This  tended  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  dominion ; 
but  as  it  was  frequently  incommodious,  a  more  usual  practice 
vvas  to  divide  the  territory.  From  such  partitions  are  derived 
those  numerous  independent  principalities  of  the  same  house, 
many  of  which  still  subsist  in  Germany.  In  1589  there  were 
eight  reigning  princes  of  the  Palatine  family;  and  fourteen, 
in°1675,  of  that  of  Saxony.2  Originally  these  partitions  were 
in  general  absolute  and  without  reversion  ;  but,  as  their  effect 
in  weakening  families  became  evident,  a  practice  was  intro- 
duced of  making  compacts  of  reciprocal  succession,  by  which 
a  fief  was  prevented  from  escheating  to  the  empire,  until  all 

i  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  66.   Pfeffel,  p.  289,  vided    into    two    branches.   Jiaden    and 

maintains  that  partitions  were  not  intro-  Hochberg,  in  1190,  with  rights  of  mutua/ 

duced  till  the  latter  end  of  the  thirteenth  reversion. 

century.     This  may  be  true  as  a  general  «  Pfeffel,  p.  289;  Putter,  p.  1S9 
rule  ;  but  I  find  the  house  of  Baden  di- 
VOL.  I.  —  M.                         36 


562  IIOUSL  OF    LUXEMBURG.  Chap.  V 

th<-  male  po  terity  of  the  first  feudatory  should  be  extinct 
Thus,  while  the  German  empire  survived,  all  the  princes  of 
Hesse  or  of  Saxony  had  reciprocal  contingencies  of  succes- 
sion, or  what  our  lawyers  call  cross-remainders,  to  each  other's 
dominions.  A  different  system  was  gradually  adopted.  By 
the  Golden  Bull  of  Charles  IV.  the  electoral  territory,  that 
is.  the  particular  district  to  which  the  electoral  suffrage  was 
inseparably  attached,  became  incapable  of  partition,  and  way 
to  descend  to  the  eldest  son.  In  the  fifteenth  century  the 
present  house  of  Brandenburg  set  the  first  example  of  estab- 
lishing primogeniture  bylaw;  the  principalities  of  Anspach 
and  Bavreuth  were  dismembered  from  it  for  the  benefit  of 
younger  branches  ;  but  it  was  declared  that  all  the  other  do- 
minions of  the  family  should  for  the  future  belong  exclusively 
to  the  reigning  elector.  This  politic  measure  was  adopted  in 
several  other  families ;  but,  even  in  the  sixteenth  century 
the  prejudice  wai  not  removed,  and  some  German  princes 
denounced  curses  on  their  posterity,  if  they  should  introduce 
the  impious  custom  of  primogeniture.1  Notwithstanding  these 
subdivisions,  and  the  most  remarkable  of  those  which  I  have 
mentioned  are  of  a  date  rather  subsequent  to  the  middle  ages, 
the  antagonist  principle  of  consolidation  by  various  means  of 
acquisition  was  so  actively  at  work  that  several  princely 
houses,  especially  those  of  Hohenzollern  or  Brandenburg,  of 
Hesse,  Wirtemburg,  and  the  Palatinate,  derive  their  impor- 
tance from  the  same  era,  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries, 
in  which  the  prejudice  against  primogeniture  was  the  strong- 
est. And  thus  it  will  often  be  found  in  private  patrimonies; 
the  tendency  to  consolidation  of  property  works  more  rapidly 
than  that  to  it-  disintegration  by  a  law  of  gavelkind. 

Weakened  by  these  subdivisions,  the  principalities  of  Ger- 
many in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  shrink  to  a 
more  and  more  diminutive  size  in  the  scale  of  nations.  But 
House  of  one  family,  the  most  illustrious  of  the  former  age, 
Luxemburg.  was  jess  exposed  to  this  enfeebling  system.  Henry 
VII.  count  of  Luxemburg,  a  man  of  much  more  persona, 
merit  than  hereditary  importance,  was  elevated  to  the  empire 
in  1308.  Most  part  of  his  short  reign  he  passed  in  Italy; 
but  he  had  a  fortunate  opportunity  of  obtaining  the  crown  of 
Bohemia  for  his  son.    John  king  of  Bohemia  did  not  himself 

»  Pfeffel,  p.  280. 


Germany.  GOLDEN  BTJLh.  5G3 

wear  the  imperial  crown;  but  three  of  his  descendant*  pos- 
sessed it,  with  less  interruption  than  could  have  been  expected. 
His  son  Charles  IV.  succeeded  Louis  of  Bavaria  in  1347; 
not  indeed  without  opposition,  for  a  double  election  and  a  civil 
war  were  matters  of  course  in  Germany.  Charles  IV.  has 
been  treated  with  more  derision  by  his  contemporaries,  and 
consequently  by  later  writers,  than  almost  any  prince  in  his- 
tory; yet  he  was  remarkably  successful  in  the  only  objects 
that  he  seriously  pursued.  Deficient  in  personal  courage, 
insensible  of  humiliation,  bending  without  shame  to  the  pope, 
to  the  Italians,  to  the  electors,  so  poor  and  so  little  reverenced 
as  to  be  arrested  by  a  butcher  at  Worms  for  want  of  paying 
his  demand,  Charles  IV.  affords  a  proof  that  a  certain  dex- 
terity and  cold-blooded  perseverance  may  occasionally  supply, 
in  a  sovereign,  the  wrant  of  more  respectable  qualities.  He 
has  been  reproached  with  neglecting  the  empire.  But  he 
never  designed  to  trouble  himself  about  the  empire,  except 
for  his  private  ends.  He  did  not  neglect  the  kingdom  of 
Bohemia,  to  which  he  almost  seemed  to  render  Germany  a 
province.  Bohemia  had  been  long  considered  as  a  fief  of 
.he  empire,  and  indeed  could  pretend  to  an  electoral  vote  by 
no  other  title.  Charles,  however,  gave  the  states  by  law  the 
right  of  choosing  a  king,  on  the  extinction  of  the  royal  family, 
which  seems  derogatory  to  the  imperial  prerogative.1  It  was 
much  more  material  that,  upon  acquiring  Brandenburg,  partly 
by  conquest,  and  partly  by  a  compact  of  succession  in  1373, 
he  not  only  invested  his  sons  with  it,  which  was  conformable 
to  usage,  but  tried  to  annex  that  electorate  forever  to  the 
kingdom  of  Bohemia.2  He  constantly  resided  at  Prague, 
where  he  founded  a  celebrated  university,  and  embellished 
the  city  with  buildings.  This  kingdom,  augmented  also  dur- 
ing his  reign  by  the  acquisition  of  Silesia,  he  bequeathed  to 
his  son  Wenceslaus,  for  whom,  by  pliancy  towards  the  elec- 
tors and  the  court  of  Rome,  he  had  procured,  against  all 
recent  example,  the  imperial  succession.3 

The  reign  of  Charles  IV.  is  distinguished  in  the  constitu- 
tional  history  of  the  empire  by  his  Golden  Bull ;  Golden  Bull. 
an  instrument  which  finally  ascertained  the  pre-  A•I>• 1365- 
rogatives  of  the  electoral  college.     The   Golden   Bull   ter- 
tninated    the    disputes  which   had   arisen    between    different 

1  Struvius,  p.  641. 

2  Pfeffel,  p.  57;',:  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  595 

3  Struvius,  p.  637. 


5G4  DEPOSITION  OF  WENCESLAUS.  Chap.  \ 

members  of  the  same  house  as  to  their  right  of  suffrage, 
which  was  declared  inherent  in  certain  definite  territories. 
The  number  was  absolutely  restrained  to  seven.  The  place 
of  legal  imperial  election-  was  iixed  at  Frankfort;  of  corn- 
nations,  at  Aix-la-Chapelle  ;  and  the  latter  ceremony  was  to 
be  performed  by  the  archbishop  of  Cologne.  These  regula- 
tions, though  consonant  to  ancient  usage,  had  not  always  been 
observed,  and  their  neglect  had  sometimes  excited  questions 
as  to  the  validity  of  elections.  The  dignity  of  elector  was 
enhanced  by  the  Golden  Bull  as  highly  as  an  imperial  edict 
could  carry  it ;  they  were  declared  equal  to  kings,  and  con- 
spiracy against  their  persons  incurred  the  penalty  of  high 
treason.1  Many  other  privileges  are  granted  to  render  them 
more  completely  sovereign  within  their  dominions.  It  seems 
extraordinary  that  Charles  should  have  voluntarily  elevated 
an  oligarchy,  from  whose  pretensions  his  predecessors  had 
frequently  suffered  injury.  But  he  had  more  to  apprehend 
from  the  two  great  families  of  Bavaria  and  Austria,  whom 
he  relatively  depressed  by  giving  such  a  preponderance  to 
the  seven  electors,  than  from  any  members  of  the  college. 
By  his  compact  with  Brandenburg  he  had  a  fair  prospect  of 
adding  a  second  vote  to  his  own  ;  and  there  was  more  room 
for  intrigue  and  management,  which  Charles  always  preferred 
to  arms,  with  a  small  number,  than  with  the  whole  body  of 
princes. 

The  next  reign,  nevertheless,  evinced  the  danger  of  in 
Deposition  vesting  the  electors  with  such  preponderating 
of  Wences-  authority.  Wenceslaus,  a  supine  and  voluptuous 
man,  less  respected,  and  more  negligent  of 
Germany,  if  possible,  than  his  father,  was  regularly  deposed 
b}"  a  majority  of  the  electoral  college  in  1400.  This  right, 
if  it  is  to  be  considered  as  a  right,  they  had  already  used 
against  Adolphus  of  Nassau  in  1298,  and  against  Louis  of 
Bavaria  in  1346.  They  chose  Robert  count  palatine  instead 
of  Wenceslaus ;  and  though  the  latter  did  not  cease  to  have 
some  adherents,  Robert  has  generally  been  counted  among 
the  lawful  emperors.2     Upon  his  death  the  empire  returned 

1  Pfeffel,     p.    565;     Putter,    p.    271;  2  Many    of   the    cities    besides    some 

Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  566.     The  Golden  Bull  princes,  continued  to  recognize  Wenees- 

not  only  fixed  the  Palatine  vote,  in  ab-  laus  throughout  the  life  of  Robert :  and 

solute  exclusion  of  Bavaria,  but  settled  the  latter  was  so  much  considered  as  .111 

a  controversy  of  long  standing  between  usurper   by  foreign  states,  that  his  am 

the  two  branches  of  the  house  of  Saxony,  bassadon  were  refused  admittance  at  thr 

Wittenberg  and  Lauenburg,  in  favor  of  council  of  Pisa.     Struvius,  r    658. 
the  former. 


(iBKBLAJsnr.  HOUSE  OF  AUSTRIA.       .  565 

to  the   house   of  Luxemburg ;  Wenceslaus  himself  waiving 
his  rights  in  favor  of  his  brother  Sigismuud  of  Hungary.1 

The  house  of  Austria  had  hitherto  given  but  two  emperors 
to  German)',  Rodolph  its  founder,  and  his  son  House  of 
Albert,  whom  a  successful  rebellion  elevated  in  Austria- 
the  place  of  Adolphus.  Upon  the  death  of  Henry  of  Lux- 
emburg, in  1313,  Frederic,  son  of  Albert,  disputed  the 
election  of  Louis  duke  of.  Bavaria,  alleging  a  majority  of 
genuine  votes.  This  produced  a  civil  war,  in  which  the 
Austrian  party  were  entirely  worsted.  Though  they  ad- 
vanced no  pretensions  to  the  imperial  dignity  during  the  rest 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  princes  of  that  line  added  to 
their  possessions  Carinthia,  Istria,  and  the  Tyrol.  As  a 
counterbalance  to  these  acquisitions,  they  lost  a  great  part  of 
their  ancient  inheritance  by  unsuccessful  wars  with  the  Swiss. 
According  to  the  custom  of  partition,  so  injurious  to  princely 
houses,  their  dominions  were  divided  among  three  branches  : 
one  reigning  in  Austria,  a  second  in  Styria  and  Albert,  n. 
the  adjacent  provinces,  a  third  in  the  Tyrol  and  AD- 1438> 
Alsace.  This  had  in  a  considerable  degree  eclipsed  the 
glory  of  the  house  of  Hapsburg.  But  it  was  now  its  destiny 
to  revive,  and  to  enter  upon  a  career  of  prosperity  which  has 
never  since  been  permanently  interrupted.  Albert  duke  of 
Austria,  who  had  married  Sigismund's  only  daughter,  the 
queen  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia,  was  raised  to  the  imperial 
throne  upon  the  death  of  his  father-in-law  in  1437.  He  died 
in  two  years,  leaving  his  wife  pregnant  with  a  son,  Ladislaus 
Posthumus,  who  afterwards  reigned  in  the  two  kingdoms  just 
mentioned ;  and  the  choice  of  the  electors  fell  upon  Frederic 
duke  of  Styria,  second-cousin  of  the  last  emperor,  from 
whose  posterity  it  never  departed,  except  in  a  single  instance, 
upon  the  extinction  of  his  male  line  in  1740. 

Frederic  III.  reigned  fifty-three   years,  a  longer  period 
chan  any  of  his   predecessors ;   and  his   personal  „  . 
character  was    more    insignificant.      With    better  Frederic  nr. 
fortune  than  could  be  expected,  considering  both  i^1440- 
these  circumstances,  he  escaped  any  overt  attempt 

1  This  election  of  Sigismund  was  not  was  not  crowned  at  Frankfort,  has  never 

uncontested  :  Josse,  or  Jodocus,  margrave  been     reckoned    among    the    emperors, 

of  Moravia,  having  been  chosen,  as  far  though    modern   critics   agree    that    his 

as  appears,  by  a  legal  majority.     Howev-  title  was  legitimate      Struvius.  p.  684; 

er,  his   death   within   three   months  re-  I'feffel,  p.  612. 
tnoYecJ    tfie   difficulty ;    and  Josse.    whr 


506 


FREDERIC   III. 


Chat.  V 


to  depose  him,  though  such  a  project  was  sometimes  in  agi- 
tation. He  reigned  during  an  interesting  age,  full  of 
remarkable  events,  and  big  with  others  of  more  leading 
importance.  The  destruction  of  the  Greek  empire,  and 
appearance  of  the  victorious  crescent  upon  the  Danube,  gave 
an  unhappy  distinction  to  the  earlier  years  of  his  reign,  and 
displayed  his  mean  and  pusillanimous  character  in  circum- 
stances which  demanded  a  hero.  At  a  later  season  he  was 
drawn  into  contentions  with  France  and  Burgundy,  winch 
ultimately  produced  a  new  and  more  general  combination 
of  European  politics.  Frederic,  always  poor,  and  scarcely 
able  to  protect  himself  in  Austria  from  the  seditions  of  his 
subjects,  or  the  inroads  of  the  king  of  Hungary,  was  yet 
another  founder  of  his  family,  and  left  their  fortunes  incom- 
parably more  prosperous  than  at  his  accession.1  The  mar- 
riage of  his  son  Maximilian  with  the  heiress  of  Burgundy 
began  that  aggrandizement  of  the  house  of  Austria  which 
Frederic  seems  to  have  anticipated.'2     The  electors,  who  had 


l  Ranke  has  drawn  the  character  of 
Frederic  III.  more  favorably,  on  the 
whole,  than  preceding  historians,  and 
with  a  discrimination  which  enables  us 
to  account  better  for  his  success  in  the 
objects  which  he  had  at  heart.  "  From 
his  youth  he  had  been  inured  to  trouble 
and  adversity.  When  compelled  to  yield, 
he  never  gave  up  a  point,  and  always 
gained  the  mastery  iu  the  end.  The 
maintenance  of  his.  prerogatives  was  the 
governing  principle  of  all  his  actions,  the 
more  because  they  acquired  an  ideal 
value  from  their  connection  with  the  im- 
perial dignity.  It  cost  him  a  long  and 
severe  struggle  to  allow  his  son  to  be 
crowned  king  of  tbe  Romans  ;  be  wished 
to  take  the  supreme  authority  undivided 
with  him  to  the  grave :  in  no  case  would 
he  grant  Maximilian  any  independent 
share  in  the  administration  of  govern- 
ment;  but  kept  him,  even  after  he  was 
king,  still  as  '  son  of  the  house  ' ;  nor 
would  he  ever  give  him  any  thing  but 
the  countship  of  Cilli ;  'for  the  rest  he 
would  have  time  enough.'  His  frugality 
bordered  on  avarice,  his  slowness  on  in- 
ertness, his  stubbornness  on  the  most 
determined  selfishness ;  yet  all  these 
faults  are  removed  from  vulgarity  by 
high  qualities.  He  had  at  bottom  a  sober 
depth  of  judgment,  a  sedate  and  inflex- 
ible honor ;  the  aged  prince,  even  when 
a  fugitive  imploring  succor,  had  a  per- 
sonal bearing  which  never  allowed  the 
majesty  of  the  empire  to  sink."  Hist. 
Reformation  (Translation),  vol.  ii.  p.  103. 


A  character  of  such  obstinate  passive 
resistance  was  well  fitted  for  his  station 
in  that  age ;  spite  of  his  poverty  and 
weakness,  he  was  hereditary  sovereign 
of  extensive  and  fertile  territories ;  he 
was  not  loved,  feared,  or  respected,  but 
he  was  necessary  ;  he  was  a  German,  and 
therefore  not  to  be  exchanged  for  a  king 
of  Hungary  or  Bohemia  ;  he  was,  not  as 
Frederic  of  Austria,  but  as  elected  em- 
peror, the  sole  hope  for  a  more  settled 
rule,  for  public  peace,  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  a  confederacy  so  ill  held  togeth 
er  by  any  other  tie.  Hence  he  succeeded 
in  what  seemed  so  difficult  —  in  pro- 
curing the  election  of  Maximilian  as 
king  of  the  Romans  :  and  interested  the 
German  diet  iu  maintaining  the  Burgun- 
dian  inheritance,  the  western  provinces  oi 
the  Netherlands,  which  the  latter's  mar- 
riage brought  into  the  house  of  Austria. 

2  The  famous  device  of  Austria,  A.  E. 
I.  0.  U.,  was  first  used  by  Frederic  III., 
who  adopted  it  on  his  plate,  books,  and 
buildings.  These  initials  stand  for, 
Austria?  Est  Imperare  Orbi  Duiverso  ; 
or,  in  German,  Alles  Erdreioh  1st  Oster- 
reich  Dnterthan  :  a  bold  assumption  for 
a  man  who  was  not  sate  in  an  inch  of 
his  dominions.  Struvius.  p.  722.  He 
confirmed  the  archiducal  title  of  his 
family,  winch  might  seem  implied  in  the 
original  grant  of  Frederic  I  ;  and  be- 
stowed other  high  privileges  above  all 
princes  of  the  empire.  These  ire  enu- 
merated in  Coxes  House  of  Austria 
vol.  i.  p.  263. 


German*.  FREE  IMPERIAL   CITIES.      .  5G7 

lost  a  good  deal  of  their  former  spirit,  and  were  giown 
sensible  of  the  necessity  of  choosing  a  powerful  sovereign, 
made  no  opposition  to  Maximilian's  becoming  king  of  the 
Romans  in  his  father's  lifetime.  The  Austrian  provinces 
were  reunited  either  under  Frederic,  or  in  the  first  years  of 
Maximilian;  so  that,  at  the  clo>e  of  that  period  which  we 
denominate  the  Middle  Ages,  the  German  empire,  sustained 
by  the  patrimonial  dominions  of  its  chief,  became  again  con- 
siderable in  the  scale  of  nations,  and  capable  of  preserving 
a  balance  between  the  ambitious  monarchies  of  France  and 
Spain. 

The  period  between  Rodolph  and  Frederic  III.  is  distin- 
guished by  no  circumstance  so  interesting  as  the  prosperous 
state  of  the  free  imperial  cities,  which  had  attained  their 
maturity  about  the  commencement  of  that  interval.  progress  of 
We  find  the  cities  of  Germany,  in  the  tenth  cen-  free  impe- 
tury,  divided  into  such  as  depended  immediately 
upon  the  empire,  which  were  usually  governed  by  their 
bishop  as  imperial  vicar,  and  such  as  were  included  in  the 
territories  of  the  dukes  and  counts.1  Some  of  the  former, 
lying  principally  upon  the  Rhine  and  in  Franconia,  acquired 
a  certain  degree  of  importance  before  the  expiration  of  the 
eleventh  century.  Worms  and  Cologne  manifested  a  zealous 
attachment  to  Henry  IV.,  whom  they  supported  in  despite  of 
their  bishops.2  His  son  Henry  V.  granted  privileges  of  en- 
franchisement to  the  inferior  townsmen  or  artisans,  who  had 
hitherto  been  distinguished  from  the  upper  class  of  freemen, 
and  particularly  relieved  them  from  oppressive  usages,  which 
either  gave  the  whole  of  their  movable  goods  to  the  lord 
upon  their  decease,  or  at  least  enabled  him  to  seize  the  best 
chattel  as  his  heriot.8  He  took  away  the  temporal  authority 
of  the  bishop,  at  least  in  several  instances,  and  restored  the 
cities  to  a  more  immediate  dependence  upon  the  empire. 
The  citizens  were  classed  in  companies,  according  to  their 
several  occupations  ;  an  institution  which  was  speedily  adopted 
in  other  commercial  countries.  It  does  not  appear  that  any 
German  city  had  obtained,  under  this  emperor,  those  privi- 
leges of  choosing  its  own  magistrates,  which  were  conceded 

o  ~  o  7 

i  Pfeffel,  p.  187.     The  Othos  adopted  to  the  lay  aristocracy.     Putter,   p.  136; 

the  same  policy  in  Germany  which  they  Struvius,  p.  252. 

had  introduced  in  Italy,  conferring  the  -  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  p.  239. 

temporal  government  of  cities  upon  the  3  Schmidt,  p.  242  ;  Pfeffel,  p.  293;  D* 

bishops;    probably  as  a  counterbalance  mont,  Corps  Diplomatique,  t.  i.  p.  64- 


5 08  FREE  IMPERIAL   CITIES.  Chai>.  V 

about  the  same  time,  in  a  few  instances,  to  those  of  France. 
Gradually,  however,  they  began  to  elect  councils  of  citizen-, 
as  a  sort  of  senate  and  magistracy.  This  innovation  might 
prvhaps  take  place  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Frederic  I.  ;2  at 
least  it  was  fully  established  in  that  of  his  grandson.  They 
were  at  first  only  assistants  to  the  imperial  or  episcopal 
bailiff,  who  probably  continued  to  administer  criminal  justice. 
But  in  the  thirteenth  century  the  citizens,  grown  richer  and 
stronger,  either  purchased  the  jurisdiction,  or  usurped  it 
through  the  lord's  neglect,  or  drove  out  the  bailiff  by  force.8 
The  great  revolution  in  Franconia  and  Suabia  occasioned  by 
the  fall  of  the  Hohenstauffen  family  completed  the  victory 
of  the  cities.  Those  which  had  depended  upon  mediate  lords 
became  immediately  connected  with  the  empire ;  and  with 
the  empire  in  its  state  of  feebleness,  when  an  occasional 
present  of  money  would  easily  induce  its  chief  to  acquiesce 
in  any  claims  of  immunity  which  the  citizens  might  prefer. 

It  was  a  natural  consequence  of  the  importance  which  the 
free  citizens  had  reached,  and  of  their  immediacy,  that  they 
were  admitted  to  a  place  in  the  diets,  or  general  meetings 
of  the  confederacy.  They  were  tacitly  acknowledged  to  be 
equally  sovereign  with  the  electors  and  princes.  No  proof 
exists  of  any  law  by  which  they  were  adopted  into  the  diet. 
We  find  it  said  that  Rodolph  of  Hapsburg,  in  1291,  renewed 
his  oath  with  the  princes,  lords,  and  cities.  Under  the  em- 
peror Henry  VII.  there  is  unequivocal  mention  of  the  three 
orders  composing  the  diet;  electors,  princes,  and  deputies 
from  cities.4  And  in  1344  they  appear  as  a  third  distinct 
college  in  the  diet  of  Frankfort.5 

The  inhabitants  of  these  free  cities  always  preserved  their 
respect  for  the  emperor,  and  gave  him  much  less  vexation 
than  his  other  subjects.  He  was  indeed  their  natural  friend. 
But  the  nobility  and  prelates  were  their  natural  enemies ; 
and  the  western  parts  of  German)'  were  the  scenes  of  irrec- 
oncilable warfare  between  the  possessors  of  fortified  castles 

i  Schmidt,  p.  245.  3  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  96;     Pfeffel,  p.  441 
2  In  the  charter  granted  by  Frederic  I.  *  Mansit    ibi    rex  sex    hebdom  adibus 
to  Spire  in  1182,  confirming  and  enlarg-  cum  principibus  electoribus  et  aliis  prill- 
ing that  of  Henry  V.,  though  no  express  cipibus  et  civitatum  ■nuntiis,  de  suo  tran 
mention  is  made  of  any  municipal  juris-  situ  et  de  pra  stamlis  Bervitiis  in  Italian 
diction,  yet  it  seems  implied  in  the  fol-  disponendo.   Auctor  apud  Schmidt,  t.  vi 
lowing  words:    Causam  in  civitate  jam  p.  31. 
lite  contestatam  non  episcopus  aut  alia  &  Pfeffel,  p.  552. 
potestas    extra    civitatem    determinari 
compellet.     Duinont,  p.  108. 


Germany.  LEAGUES   OF  THE  CITIES.  5G9 

and  the  inhabitants  of  fortified  cities.  Each  party  was  fre- 
quently the  aggressor.  The  nobles  were  too  often  mere 
robbers,  who  lived  upon  the  plunder  of  travellers.  But  the 
citizens  were  almost  equally  inattentive  to  the  rights  of  others. 
It  was  their  policy  to  offer  the  privileges  of  burghership  to 
all  strangers.  The  peasantry  of  feudal  lords,  flying  to  a 
neighboring  town,  found  an  asylum  constantly  open.  A 
multitude  of  aliens,  thus  seeking  as  it  were  sanctuary,  dwelt 
in  the  suburbs  or  liberties,  between  the  city  walls  and  the 
palisades  which  bounded  the  territory.  Hence  they  were 
called  Pfahlbiirger,  or  burgesses  of  the  palisades ;  and  this 
encroachment  on  the  rights  of  the  nobility  was  positively, 
but  vainly,  prohibited  by  several  imperial  edicts,  especially 
the  Golden  Bull.  Another  class  were  the  Ausbiirger,  or 
outburghers,  who  had  been  admitted  to  privileges  of  citizen- 
ship, though  resident  at  a  distance,  and  pretended  in  conse- 
quence to  be  exempted  from  all  dues  to  their  original  feudal 
superiors.  If  a  lord  resisted  so  unreasonable  a  claim,  he 
incurred  the  danger  of  bringing  down  upon  himself  the  ven- 
geance of  the  citizens.  These  outburghers  are  in  general 
classed  under  the  general  name  of  Pfahlbiirger  by  contem- 
porary writers.1 

As  the  towns  were  conscious  of  the  hatred  which  the 
nobility  bore  towards  them,  it  was  their  interest  Leagues  of 
to  make  a  common  cause,  and  render  mutual  the  Clties- 
assistance.  From  this  necessity  of  maintaining,  by  united 
exertions,  their  general  liberty,  the  German  cities  never 
suffered  the  petty  jealousies,  which  might  no  doubt  exist 
among  them,  to  ripen  into  such  deadly  feuds  as  sullied  the 
glory,  and  ultimately  destroyed  the  freedom,  of  Lombardy. 
They  withstood  the  bishops  and  barons  by  confederacies  of 
their  own,  framed  expressly  to  secure  their  commerce  against 
rapine,  or  unjust  exactions  of  toll.  More  than  sixty  cities, 
with  three  ecclesiastical  electors  at  their  head,  formed  the 
league  of  the  Rhine,  in  1255,  to  repel  the  inferior  nobility, 
who,  having  now  become  immediate,  abused  that  independence 
by  perpetual  robberies.2  The  Hanseatic  Union  owes  its  ori- 
gin to  no  other  cause,  and  may  be  traced  perhaps  to  rather  a 
higher  date.     About  the  year   1370   a  league  was  formed, 

'-Schmidt,  t.   iv.  p.  98;  t.   vi.  p.  76;        2  Struvius,   p.    498;    Schmidt,    t     iv 
Pfeffel.    p.    402 .    Du    Cange,   Gloss,   v.    p.  101 ;  Pfeffel,  p.  416. 
Pfahlbiirger.     Faubourg  is  derived  from 
this  word. 


570  PROVINCIAL   STATES.  Chai    V. 

which,  though  it  did  not  continue  so  long,  seems  to  have 
produced  more  striking  effects  in  Germany.  The  cities  of 
Suabia  and  the  Rhine  united  themselves  in  a  strict  con- 
federacy against  the  princes,  and  especially  the  families  of 
Wirtemburg  and  Bavaria.  It  is  said  that  the  emperor 
Wenceslaus  secretly  abetted  their  projects.  The  recent 
successes  of  the  Swiss,  who  had  now  almost  established  their 
republic,  inspired  their  neighbors  in  the  empire  with  expec- 
tations which  the  event  did  not  realize ;  for  they  were  de- 
feated in  this  war,  and  ultimately  compelled  to  relinquish 
their  league.  Counter-associations  were  formed  by  the  no- 
bles, styled  Society  of  St.  George,  St.  William,  the  Lion,  or 
the  Panther.1 

The  spirit  of  political  liberty  was  not  confined  to  the  free 
Provincial  immediate  cities.  In  all  the  German  principalities 
states  of  the  a  form  of  limited  monarchy  prevailed,  reflecting, 
empire.  0R  &  re(juced  scaiej  the  general  constitution  of  the 

empire.  As  the  emperors  shared  their  legislative  sovereignty 
with  the  diet,  so  all  the  princes  who  belonged  to  that  assem- 
bly had  their  own  provincial  states,  composed  of  their  feudal 
vassals  and  of  their  mediate  towns  within  their  territory.  No 
tax  could  be  imposed  without  consent  of  the  states ;  and,  in 
some  countries,  the  prince  was  obliged  to  account  for  the 
proper  disposition  of  the  money  granted.  In  all  matters  of 
importance  affecting  the  principality,  and  especially  in  cases 
of  partition,  it  was  necessary  to  consult  them ;  and  they 
sometimes  decided  between  competitors  in  a  disputed  succes- 
sion, though  this  indeed  more  strictly  belonged  to  the  emperor. 
The  provincial  states  concurred  with  the  prince  in  making 
laws,  except  such  as  were  enacted  by  the  general  diet.  The 
city  of  Wurtzburg,  in  the  fourteenth  century,  tells  its  bishop 
that,  if  a  lord  would  make  any  new  ordinance,  the  custom  is 
that  he  must  consult  the  citizens,  who  have  always  opposed 
his  innovatinp:  unon  the  ancient  lawrs  without  their  consent.'2 

The  ancient  imperial  domain,  or  possessions  which  be- 
.,.     ,.         longed  to  the  chief  of  the   empire  as  such,  had 

Alienation  .  °.  •  -r»      •  -i  1 

of  the  im-      originally    been    very   extensive.      Besides   large 

main1  d°"        estates  in  every  province,  the  territory  upon  each 

bank  of    the  Rhine,  afterwards  occupied  by  the 

counts    palatine    and    ecclesiastical    electors,   was,    until    the 

»  Struvius,  p.  649  ;  PfefFel,  p.  586  ;  Schmidt,  t.  v.  p.  10 ;  t.  vi.  p.  78.  Putter,  p.  298 
«  Schmidt,  t.  vi.  p   8.     Putter,  p.  236. 


ofrmant.  DIET   OF  WORMS  571 

thirteenth  century,  an  exclusive  property  of  t  .e  emperor. 
This  imperial  domain  was  deemed  so  adequate  to  the  sup- 
port of  his  dignity  that  it.  was  usual,  if  not  obligatory,  for 
him  to  grant  away  his  patrimonial  domains  upon  his  election. 
But  the  necessities  of  Frederic  II.,  and  the  long  confusion 
that  ensued  upon  his  death,  caused  the  domain  to  be  almost 
entirely  dissipated.  Rodolph  made  some  efforts  to  retrieve 
it,  but  too  late ;  and  the  poor  remains  of  what  had  belonged 
to  Charlemagne  and  Otho  were  alienated  by  Charles  IV.1 
This  produced  a  necessary  change  in  that  part  of  the  con- 
stitution which  deprived  an  emperor  of  hereditary  possessions, 
I'  was,  however,  some  time  before  it  took  place.  Even 
Albert  I.  conferred  the  duchy  of  Austria  upon  his  son,  when 
he  was  chosen  emperor.2  Louis  of  Bavaria  was  the  first 
who  retained  his  hereditary  dominions,  and  made  them  his 
residence.3  Charles  IV.  and  Wenceslaus  lived  almost  wholly 
in  Bohemia,  Sigismund  chiefly  in  Hungary,  Frederic  III.  in 
Austria.  This  residence  in  their  hereditary  countries,  while 
it  seemed  rather  to  lower  the  imperial  dignity,  and  to  lessen 
their  connection  with  the  general  confederacy,  gave  them 
intrinsic  power  and  influence.  If  the  emperors  of  the  houses 
of  Luxemburg  and  Austria  were  not  like  the  Conrads  and 
Frederics,  they  were  at  least  very  superior  in  importance  to 
the  Williams  and  Adolphuses  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

The   accession   of  Maximilian   nearly  coincides   with   the 
expedition  of  Charles  VIII.  against  Naples  ;  and  Accession  of 
I   should  here  close  the   German  history  of  the  Maximilian. 

•  i  n  •  c        i  i  Diet  of 

middle  age,  were  it  not  tor  the  great  epoch  which  Worms. 
is  made  by  the  diet  of  Worms  in   1495.     This  AD- 1495> 
assembly  is  celebrated  for  the  establishment  of  a  perpetual 
public  peace,  and  of  a  paramount  court  of  justice,  the  Im- 
perial Chamber. 

The    same    causes    which   produced    continual    hostilities 
among    the    French    nobility   were    not  likely   to  _.  ... . 

i  n  ii  i         r^  ii      Estabksh- 

operate  less  powerfully  on  the   (jrermans,  equally  ment  of 
warlike    with    their    neighbors,    and    rather    less  public  pe&ce- 
civilized.       But   while    the    imperial    government    was    still 
vigorous,   they  were   kept   under   some   restraint.     We  find 
Henry  III.,  the  most  powerful  of  the  Franconian  emperors, 

1  Pfeffel,  p.  580.  he  should  retain  any  escheated  fief  for 

2  Id.  p.  494.     Struvius,  p.  646.  the  domain,  instead  of  granting  it  away  : 
8  Struvius,  p.  611.     In  the  capitulation     so  completely  was  the  public   policy  of 

vf  Robert  it  was  expressly  provided  that     the  empire  reversed.    Schmidt,  t.  v.  p.  44 


572  PUBLIC   PEACE.  Ch*p.   v. 

forbidding  all  private  defiances,  and  establishing  soler  ily  a 
general  peace.1  After  his  time  the  natural  tendency  of  man- 
ners overpowered  all  attempts  to  coerce  it,  and  private  war 
raged  without  limits  in  the  empire.  Frederic  I.  endeavored 
to  repress  it  by  a  regulation  which  admitted  its  legality. 
This  was  the  law  of  defiance  (jus  diffidationis),  which  required 
a  solemn  declaration  of  war,  and  three  days'  notice,  before 
the  commencement  of  hostile  measures.  All  persons  contra- 
vening this  provision  were  deemed  robbers  and  not  legiti- 
mate enemies.2  Frederic  II.  carried  the  restraint  further, 
and  limited  the  right  of  self-redress  to  cases  where  justice 
could  not  be  obtained.  Unfortunately  there  was,  in  later 
times,  no  sufficient  provision  for  rendering  justice.  The 
German  empire  indeed  had  now  assumed  so  peculiar  a 
character,  and  the  mass  of  states  which  composed  it  were 
in  so  many  respects  sovereign  within  their  own  territories, 
that  wars,  unless  in  themselves  unjust,  could  not  be  made  a 
subject  of  reproach  against  them,  nor  considered,  strictly 
speaking,  as  private.  It  was  certainly  most  desirable  to  put 
an  end  to  them  by  common  agreement,  and  by  the  only 
means  that  could  render  war  unnecessary,  the  establishment 
of  a  supreme  jurisdiction.  War  indeed,  legally  undertaken, 
was  not  the  only  nor  the  severest  grievance.  A  very  large 
proportion  of  the  rural  nobility  lived  by  robbery.8  Their 
castles,  as  the  ruins  still  bear  witness,  were  erected  upon 
inaccessible  hills,  and  in  defiles  that  command  the  public 
road.  An  archbishop  of  Cologne  having  built  a  fortress  of 
this  kind,  the  governor  inquired  how  he  w^h  to  maintain 
himself,  no  revenue  having  been  assigned  for  that  purpose : 
the  prelate  only  desired  him  to  remark  that  the  castle  was 
situated  near  the  junction  of  four  roads.4  As  commerce  in- 
creased, and  the  example  of  French  and  Italian  civilization 
rendered  the  Germans  more  sensible  to  their  own  rudeness, 
the  preservation  of  public  peace  was  loudly  demanded. 
Every  diet  under  Frederic  III.  professed  to  occupy  itself 
with  the  two  great  objects  of  domestic  reformation,   peace 

i  Pfeffel,  p.  212.  sent.    Pet.  de  Andlo.  apud  Schmidt,  t.  t 

2  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  108,  et  infra  ;  Pfeffel,  p.  490. 
p.  340;  Putter,  p  205.  4  Quern   cum   officiatus    suus  interro- 

:>  Geruutni     atque    Alemanni,    quibus  gans,  de  quo  castrum  deberet  retinere, 

census  patrimonii  ad  victum  suppetit,  et  cum   annuis    careret    reditibus,   dicitur 

hos  qui  procul  urbibus,  aut  qui  castellis  respondisse  ;    Quatuor   viae    sunt    trans 

et  oppidulis  dominantur,  quorum  mag-  castrum  situatae.    Auctorapud  Schmidt. 

wa  pars   latrocinio  deditur,  nobiles  cen-  p.  492. 


iERMAN*.  IMPERIAL   CHAMBER.  57;} 

and  law.  Temporary  cessations,  during  which  all  private 
nostility  was  illegal,  were  sometimes  enacted;  and,  if  ob- 
served, which  may  well  be  doubted,  might  contribute  to 
accustom  men  to  habits  of  greater  tranquillity.  The  leagues 
of  the  cities  were  probably  more  efficacious  checks  upon  the 
disturbers  of  order.  In  148G  a  ten  years'  peace  was  pro- 
claimed, and  before  the  expiration  of  this  period  the  per- 
petual abolition  of  the  right  of  defiance  was  happily  accom- 
plished in  the  diet  of  Worms.1 

These  wars,  incessantly  waged  by  the  states  of  Germany, 
seldom  ended  in  conquest.  Very  few  princely  houses  of  the 
middle  ages  were  aggrandized  by  such  means.  That  small 
and  independent  nobility,  the  counts  and  knights  of  the  em- 
pire whom  the  revolutions  of  our  own  age  have  annihilated, 
stood  through  the  storms  of  centuries  with  little  diminution 
of  their  numbers.  An  incursion  into  the  enemy's  territory,  a 
pitched  battle,  a  siege,  a  treaty,  are  the  general  circumstances 
of  the  minor  wars  of  the  middle  ages,  as  far  as  they  appear 
in  lristory.  Before  the  invention  of  artillery,  a  strongly  forti- 
fied castle  or  walled  city,  was  hardly  reduced  except  by 
famine,  which  a  besieging  army,  wasting  improvidently  its 
means  of  subsistence,  was  lull  as  likely  to  feel.  That  in- 
vention altered  the  condition  of  society,  and  introduced  an 
inequality  of  forces,  that  rendered  war  more  inevitably  ruin- 
ous to  the  inferior  party.  Its  first  and  most  beneficial  effect 
was  to  bring  the  plundering  class  of  the  nobility  into  control ; 
their  castles  were  more  easily  taken,  and  it  became  their  in- 
terest to  deserve  the  protection  of  law.  A  few  of  these  con- 
tinued to  follow  their  old  profession  after  the  diet  of  Worms ; 
but  they  were  soon  overpowered  by  the  more  efficient  police 
established  under  Maximilian. 

The  next  object  of  the  diet  was  to  provide  an  effectual 
remedy  for  private  wrongs  which  might  supersede  imperial 
all  pretence  for  taking  up  arms.  The  administra-  Chamber- 
tion  of  justice  had  always  been  a  high  prerogative  as  well  as 
bounden  duty  of  the  emperors.  It  was  exercised  originally 
by  themselves  in  person,  or  by  the  count  palatine,  the  judge 
who  always  attended  their  court.  In  the  provinces  of  Ger- 
many the  dukes  were  intrusted  with  this  duty ;  but,  in  order 
to  control  their  influence,  Otho  the  Great  appointed  provin- 
cial counts  palatine,  whose  jurisdiction  was  in  some  respects 

>  Scnmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  116;  t.  v.  p  338,  371 ;  t.  vi.  j.  84    Putter,  p.  292,  348 


574  IMPERIAL  CHAMBER.  Chap.  V 

exclusive  of  that  still  possessed  by  the  dukes.  As  the  latter 
became  more  independent  of  the  empire,  the  provincial 
counts  palatine  lost  the  importance  of  their  office,  though 
their  name  may  be  traced  to  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
centuries.1  The  ordinary  administration  of  justice  by  the 
emperors  went  into  disuse ;  in  cases  where  states  of  the 
empire  were  concerned,  it  appertained  to  the  diet,  or  to  a 
Bpecial  court  of  princes.  The  first  attempt  to  reestablish  an 
imperial  tribunal  was  made  by  Frederic  II.  in  a  diet  held  at 
Mentz  in  1235.  A  judge  of  the  court  was  appointed  to  sit 
daily,  with  certain  assessors,  half  nobles,  half  lawyers,  and 
with. jurisdiction  over  all  causes  where  princes  of  the  empire 
were  not  concerned.2  Rodolph  of  Hapsburg  endeavored  to 
give  efficacy  to  this  judicature;  but  after  his  reign  it  under- 
went the  fate  of  all  those  parts  of  the  Germanic  constitution 
which  maintained  the  prerogatives  of  the  emperors.  Sigi^- 
mund  endeavored  to  revive  this  tribunal ;  but  as  he  did  not 
render  it  permanent,  nor  fix  the  place  of  its  sittings,  it  pro- 
duced little  other  good  than  as  it  excited  an  earnest  anxiety 
for  a  regular  system.  This  system,  delayed  throughout  the 
reign  of  Frederic  III.,  was  reserved  for  the  first  diet  of 
his  son.3 

The  Imperial  Chamber,  such  was  the  name  of  the  new 
tribunal,  consisted,  at  its  original  institution,  of  a  chief  judge, 
who  was  to  be  chosen  among  the  princes  or  counts,  and  of 
sixteen  assessors,  partly  of  noble  or  equestrian  rank,  partly 
professors  of  law.  They  were  named  by  the  emperor  with 
the  approbation  of  the  diet.  The  functions  of  the  Imperial 
Chamber  were  chiefly  the  two  following.  They  exercised 
an  appellant  jurisdiction  over  causes  that  had  been  decided 
by  the  tribunals  established  in  states  of  the  empire.  Bui 
their  jurisdiction  in  private  causes  was  merely  appellant 
According  to  the  original  law  of  Germany,  no  man  could  be 
sued  except  in  the  nation  or  province  to  which  he  belonged. 
The  early  emperors  travelled  from  one  part  of  their  domin- 
ions to  another,  in  order  to  render  justice  consistently  with 
this  fundamental  privilege.  When  the  Luxemburg  emperors 
fixed  their  residence  in  Bohemia,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  im 
perial  court  in  the  first  instance  would  have  ceased  of  itself 


i  Pfeffel,  p.  180. 

a  Idem,  p.  386 ;  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  56- 

3  Pfeffel,  t.  ii.  p.  G6. 


Germ  amy.  ESTABLISHMENT  OF  CIRCLES.  575 

by  the  operation  of  this  ancient  rule.  It  was  not,  however, 
strictly  complied  with ;  and  it  is  said  that  the  emperors  had 
a  concurrent  jurisdiction  with  the  provincial  tribunal-  even 
in  private  causes.  They  divested  themselves,  nevertheless, 
of  this  right  by  granting  privileges  de  non  evocando  ;  so  that 
no  subject  of  a  state  which  enjoyed  such  a  privilege  could  be 
summoned  into  the  imperial  court.  All  the  electors  possess- 
ed this  exemption  by  the  terms  of  the  Golden  Bull ;  and  it 
was  specially  granted  to  the  burgraves  of  Nuremberg,  and 
some  other  princes.  This  matter  was  finally  settled  at  the 
diet  of  Worms ;  and  the  Imperial  Chamber  was  positively 
restricted  from  taking  cognizance  of  any  causes  in  the  first 
instance,  even  where  a  state  of  the  empire  was  one  of  the 
parties.  It  was  enacted,  to  obviate  the  denial  of  justice  that 
appeared  likely  to  result  from  the  regulation  in  the  latter 
case,  that  every  elector  and  prince  should  establish  a  tribunal 
in  his  own  dominions,  where  suits  against  himself  might  be 
entertained.1 

The  second  part  of  the  chamber's  jurisdiction  related  to 
disputes  between  two  states  of  the  empire.  But  these  two 
could  only  come  before  it  by  way  of  appeal.  During  the 
period  of  anarchy  which  preceded  the  establishment  of  its 
jurisdiction,  a  custom  was  introduced,  in  order  to  prevent  the 
constant  recurrence  of  hostilities,  of  referring  the  quarrels  of 
states  to  certain  arbitrators,  called  Austregues,  chosen  among 
states  of  the  same  rank.  This  conventional  reference  be- 
came so  popular  that  the  princes  would  not  consent  to  aban- 
don it  on  the  institution  of  the  Imperial  Chamber ;  but,  on 
the  contrary,  it  was  changed  into  an  invariable  and  universal 
law,  that  all  disputes  between  different  states  must,  in  the 
first  instance,  be  submitted  to  the  arbitration  of  Aus- 
tregues.2 

The  sentences  of  the  chamber  would  have  been  very  idly 
pronounced,  if  means  had  not  been  devised  to  carry  Establisn. 
them  into  execution.     In  earlier  times  the  want  of  meat  of 
coercive  process  had  been  more  felt  than  that  of circ  es* 
actual  jurisdiction.     For  a  few  years  after  the  establishment 
of  the  chamber  this   deficiency    was    not  supplied.     But  in 
1501   an   institution,   originally   planned    under  Wenceslaus, 
and  attempted  by  Albert  II.,  was  carried  into  effect.     The 

i  Schmidt,  t.  v.  p.  373  ;  Putter,  p.  372  a  Putter,  p  361 ;  Pfeffel  p  452 


576  AULIC  COUNCfL.  Chap.  V 

empire,  with  the  exception  of  the  electorates  and  the  Austrian 
dominions,  was  divided  into  >ix  circles  ;  each  of  which  had  its 
council  of  states,  its  director  whose  province  it  was  to  convoke 
them,  and  its  military  force  to  compel  obedience.  In  1^12 
four  more  circles  were  added,  comprehending  those  states 
which  had  been  excluded  in  the  first  division.  It  was  the 
business  of  the  police  of  the  circles  to  enforce  the  execution  of 
sentences  pronounced  by  the  Imperial  Chamber  against  re 
fractory  states  of  the  empire.1 

As  the  judges  of  the  Imperial  Chamber  were  appointed 
Auiic  with"  the  consent  of  the  diet,  and  held  their  sittings 

in  a  free  imperial  city,  its  establishment  seemed 
rather  to  encroach  on  the  ancient  prerogatives  of  the  emperors. 
Maximilian  expressly  reserved  these  in  consenting  to  the  new 
tribunal.  And,  in  order  to  revive  them,  he  soon  afterwards 
instituted  an  Aulic  Council  at  Vienna,  composed  of  judges 
appointed  by  himself,  and  under  the.  political  control  of  the 
Austrian  government.  Though  some  German  patriots  re- 
garded this  tribunal  with  jealousy,  it  continued  until  the  dis- 
solution of  the  empire.  The  Aulic  Council  had,  in  all  cases, 
a  concurrent  jurisdiction  with  the  Imperial  Chamber ;  an  ex- 
clusive one  in  feudal  and  some  other  causes.  But  it  was 
equally  confined  to  cases  of  appeal ;  and  these,  by  multiplied 
privileges  de  non  appellando,  granted  to  the  electoral  and  su- 
perior princely  houses,  were  gradually  reduced  into  moderate 
compass.2 

The  Germanic  constitution  may  be  reckoned  complete,  as 
to  all  its  essential  characteristics,  in  the  reign  of  Maximilian. 
In  later  times,  and  especially  by  the  treaty  of  Westphalia,  it 
underwent  several  modifications.  Whatever  might  be  its  de- 
fects, and  many  of  them  seem  to  have  been  susceptible  of  re- 
formation without  destroying  the  system  of  government,  it 
had  one  invaluable  excellence  :  it  protected  the  rights  of  the 
weaker  against  the  stronger  powers.  The  law  of  nations  was 
first  taught  in  Germany,  and  grew  out  of  the  public  law  of 
the  empire.  To  narrow,  as  far  as  possible,  the  rights  of 
war  and  of  conquest,  was  a  natural  principle  of  those  who  be- 
longed to  petty  states,  and  had  nothing  to  tempt  them  in  am- 
bition. No  revolution  of  our  own  eventful  age,  except  the 
fall  of  the  ancient  French  system  of  government,  has  been  so 

i  Putter,  p.  365,  t.  ii.  p.  100.  2  Putter,  p.  357 ;  Pfeffel,  p.  102. 


Gerv^xy.  LIMITS   OF  THE  EMPIRE.  577 

extensive,  or  so  likely  to  produce  important  consequences,  as 
the  spontaneous  dissolution  of  the  German  empire.  Whether 
the  new  confederacy  that  has  been  substituted  for  that  vener- 
able constitution  will  be  equally  favorable  to  peace,  justice, 
and  liberty,  is  among  the  most  interesting  and  difficult  prob 
lems  that  can  occupy  a  philosophical  observer.1 

At  the  accession  of  Conrad  I.  Germany  had  by  no  means 
reached  its  present  extent  on  the  eastern  frontier.  Limits  of 
Henry  the  Fowler  and  the  Othos  made  great  ac-  the  emPire 
quisitions  upon  that  side.  But  tribes  of  Sclavonian  origin, 
generally  called  Venedic,  or  less  properly,  Vandal,  occupied 
the  northern  coast  from  the  Elbe  to  the  Vistula.  These  were 
independent,  and  formidable  both  to  the  kings  of  Denmark 
and  princes  of  Germany,  till,  in  the  reign  of  Frederic  Barba- 
rossa,  two  of  the  latter,  Henry  the  Lion,  duke  of  Saxony,  and 
Albert  the  Bear,  margrave  of  Brandenburg,  subdued  Meck- 
lenburg and  Pomerania,  which  afterwards  became  duchies  of 
the  empire.  Bohemia  was  undoubtedly  subject,  in  a  feudal 
sense,  to  Frederic  I.  and  his  successors  ;  though  its  connection 
with  Germany  was  always  slight.  The  emperors  sometimes 
assumed  a  sovereignty  over  Denmark,  Hungary,  and  Poland. 
But  what  they  gained  upon  this  quarter  was  compensated  by 
the  gradual  separation  of  the  Netherlands  from  their  domin- 
ion, and  by  the  still  more  complete  loss  of  the  kingdom  of 
Aries.  The  house  of  Burgundy  possessed  most  part  of  the 
former,  and  paid  as  little  regard  as  possible  to  the  imperial 
supremacy  ;  though  the  German  diets  in  the  reign  of  Maxi- 
milian still  continued  to  treat  the  Netherlands  as  equally  sub- 
ject to  their  lawful  control  with  the  states  on  the  right  bank 
of  the  Rhine.  But  the  provinces  between  the  Rhone  and  the 
Alps  were  absolutely  separated;  Switzerland  had  completely 
succeeded  in  establishing  her  own  independence  ;  and  the 
kimis  of  France  no  longer  sought  even  the  ceremonv  of 
an  imperial  investiture  for  Dauphine  and  Provence. 

Bohemia,  which  received  the  Christian  faith  in  the  tenth 
century,  was  elevated  to  the  rank  of  a  kingdom  Bohemia_ 
near  the  end  of  the  twelfth.    The  dukes  and  kings  its  constitu- 
of  Bohemia  were  feudally  dependent  upon  the  em- 
perors, from  whom  they  received  investiture.  They  possessed, 
in  return,  a  suffrage  among  the  seven  electors,  and  held  one 

i  The  first  edition  of  this  work  was  published  early  in  1818 
VOL.  I.  —  m.  37 


578  HOUSE  OF  LUXEMBURG.  £ftai>.  V. 

of  the  great  offices  in  the  imperial  court.     But  separated  bj  a 

rampart  of  mountains,  by  a  difference  of  origin  and  language, 
and  perhaps  by  national  prejudices  from  Germany,  the  Bohe- 
mians withdrew  a-  far  as  possible  from  the  general  politics  of 
the  confederacy.  The  kings  obtained  dispensations  from  at- 
tending the  diets  of  the  empire,  nor  were  they  able  to  re- 
instate themselves  in  the  privilege  thus  abandoned  till  the 
beginning  of  the  lasl  century.1  The  government  of  this  king- 
dom, in  a  very  slight  degree  partaking  ot  the  feudal  character,* 
bore  rather  a  resemblance  to  that  of  Poland;  but  the  nobility 
were  divided  into  two  classes,  the  baronial  and  the  equestrian, 
and  the  burghers  formed  a  third  state  in  the  national  diet.  For 
the  peasantry,  they  were  in  a  condition  of  servitude,  or  predial 
villeinage.  The  royal  authority  was  restrained  by  a  corona- 
tion oath,  by  a  permanent  senate,  and  by  frequent  assemblies 
of  the  diet,  where  a  numerous  and  armed  nobility  appeared 
to  secure  their  liberties  by  law  or  force.3  The  sceptre  passed, 
in  ordinary  times,  to  the  nearest  heir  of  the  royal  blood  ;  but 
the  right  of  election  was  only  suspended,  and  no  king  of  Bo- 
hemia ventured  to  boast  of  it  as  his  inheritance.4  This  mix- 
ture of  elective  and  hereditary  monarchy  was  common,  as  we 
have  seen,  to  most  European  kingdoms  in  their  original  con- 
stitution, though  few  continued  so  long  to  admit  the  participa- 
tion of  popular  suffrages. 

The  reigning  dynasty  having  become  extinct  in  1306,  by 
House  of  the  death  of  Wenceslaus,  son  of  that  Ottocar  who, 
Luxemburg.  after  extending  his  conquests  to  the  Baltic  Sea, 
and  almost  to  the  Adriatic,  had  lost  his  life  in  an  unsuccessful 
contention  with  the  emperor  Rodolph,  the  Bohemians  chose 
John  of  Luxemburg,  son  of  Henry  VII.  Under  the  kings  of 
this  family  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  especially  Charles 
IV.,  whose  character  appeared  in  a  far  more  advantageous 
light  in  his  native  domains  than  in  the  empire,  Bohemia  im- 
.-ibed  some  portion  of  refinement  and  science.5     An  university 

1  Pfeffel,  t.  ii.  p.  497.  of  the  kings,  about  the  year  1300,  sen' 

Bona  ipsorum    tota   Bohemia   plera-  for  an  Italian  lawyer  to  compile  a  code. 

que  omnia   hasreditaria   sunt  seu  alodi-  But   the  nobility  refused  to  consent  to 

aha,  perpauca feudalia.     Stransky,  Resp.  this:   aware,    probably,    of    the    con.~r- 

Bohemica,  p.  302.     Stransky  was  a  Bo-  quences   of    letting    in   the    prerogative 

nemian  protestan*,,  who  ded  to  Holland  doctrines  of  the  civilians.     They  opposed, 

after  the  subversion  of  the   civil  and  re-  at  the  same  time,  the  institution  of  an 

ligious   liberties  of  his  country  by  the  university  at   Prague;    which,   however 

fatal  battle  of  Prague  in  1621.  took  place  afterwards  under  Charles  IV. 

3  Dubravius,  the  Bohemian  historian  *  Stransky,     Hesp.     Bohem         Coxe  • 

relates   (lib.    xviii.)    that,   the   kingdom  House  of  Austria,  p.  487 

having  no  written  laws,  Wenceslaus,  one  5  Schmidt;  Coxe 


Germany.  THE  HUSSITES.  579 

erected  by  Charles  at  Prague,  became  one  of  the  most  cele- 
brated in  Europe.  John  Huss,  rector  of  the  uni-  John  Hugs. 
versity,  who  had  distinguished  himself  by  opposi-  AD- 1416- 
tion  to  many  abuses  then  prevailing  in  the  church,  repaired  to 
the  council  of  Constance,  under  a  safe-conduct  from  the  em- 
peror Sigismund.  In  violation  of  this  pledge,  to  the  indelible 
infamy  of  that  prince  and  of  the  council,  he  was  condemned 
to  be  burned ;  and  his  disciple,  Jerome  of  Prague,  underwent 
afterwards  the  same  fate.  His  countrymen,  aroused  by  this 
atrocity,  flew  to  arms.     They  found  at  their  head 

X    ,,  -..  •*  ,  .         Hussite  war. 

one   ol    those    extraordinary   men    whose    genius, 
created  by  nature  and  called  into  action  by  fortuitous  events, 
appears  to   borrow    no  reflected    light  from  that  of  others. 
John  Zisca   had   not   been   trained  in  any  school  ,  ,    „. 

-,  .   i  ill  ...         it.         .         ,  -  r.  John  Zisca. 

which  could  have  initiated  him  in  the  science  of 
war ;  that  indeed,  except  in  Italy,  was  still  rude,  and  nowhere 
more  so  than  in  Bohemia.  But,  self-taught,  he  became  one 
of  the  greatest  captains  who  had  appeared  hitherto  in  Europe. 
It  renders  his  exploits  more  marvellous  that  he  was  totally 
deprived  of  sight.  Zisca  has  been  called  the  inventor  of  the 
modern  art  of  fortification  ;  the  famous  mountain  near  Prague, 
fanatically  called  Tabor,  became,  by  his  skill,  an  impregna- 
ble entrenchment.  For  his  stratagems  he  has  been  compared 
to  Hannibal.  In  battle,  being  destitute  of  cavalry,  he  dis- 
posed at  intervals  ramparts  of  carriages  filled  with  soldiers,  to 
defend  his  troops  from  the  enemy's  horse.  His  own  station 
was  by  the  chief  standard ;  where,  after  hearing  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  situation  explained,  he  gave  his  orders  for 
the  disposition  of  the  army.  Zisca  was  never  defeated ;  and 
his  genius  inspired  the  Hussites  with  such  enthusiastic  affec- 
tion, that  some  of  those  who  had  served  under  him  refused  to 
obey  any  other  general,  and  denominated  themselves  Orphans 
in  commemoration  of  his  loss.  He  was  indeed  a  ferocious 
enemy,  though  some  of  his  cruelties  might,  perhaps,  be  ex- 
tenuated by  the  law  of  retaliation ;  but  to  his  soldiers  affable 
und  generous,  dividing  among  them  all  the  spoil.1 

Even  during  the  lifetime  of  Zisca  the  Hussite  sect  was 
disunited  ;  the  citizens  of  Prague  and  many  of  the  caiixtins. 
nobility  contenting  themselves  with  moderate  de-  AD- 1424 
mands,  while  the  Taborites,  his  peculiar  followers,  were  aetu 

1  Lenfant,  Hist,  dt  ia  Guerre  des  Hussites;  Schmidt ;   Coxe 


580  HUNGARY.  Chap.  V 

ated  by  a  most  panatical  frenzy.     The  former  took  the  name 
of  Calixtins,  from  their  retention  of  the  sacramental  cup,  of 
which  the  priests  had  latterly  thought  tit  to  debar  laymen 
an  abuse  so  totally  without  pretence  or  apology,  that  nothing 
less   than   the   determined   obstinacy  of  the   Romish  church 
could  have  maintained  it  to  this  time.    The  Taborites,  though 
no  longer  led  by  Zisca,  gained  some  remarkable  victories,  but 
were  at  last  wholly  defeated  ;  while  the  Catholic  and  Calixtin 
parties  came  to  an  accommodation,  by  which  Sigismund  was 
acknowledged  as  king  of  Bohemia,  which  he  had  claimed  by 
the  title  of  heir  to  his  brother  Wenceslaus,  and  a  few  indul- 
gences, especially  the  use  of  the  sacramental  cup, 
conceded  to  the  moderate  Hussites.     But  this  com- 
pact,  though   concluded   by  the  council  of   Basle,  being  ill 
observed,  through  the  perfidious  bigotry  of  the  see  of  Rome, 
the  reformers  armed  again  to  defend  their  religious  liberties, 
and  ultimately  elected  a  nobleman  of  their  own  party,  by 
„        name  George  Podiebrad,  to  the  throne  of  Bohemia, 
which  he  maintained   during  his  life  with   great 
vigor  and  prudence.1     Upon  his  death  they  chose  Uladislaus, 
a  d  1471        son  °f  Casimir  king  of  Poland,  who  afterwards 
obtained   also    the    kingdom    of   Hungary.      Both 
these    crowns  were    conferred  on  his  son  Louis, 
after  whose  death,  in  the  unfortunate  battle  of  Mohacz,  Fer- 
dinand of  Austria  became  sovereign  of  the  two  kingdoms. 

The  Hungarians,  that  terrible  people  who  laid  waste  the 
Hun  ar  Italian   and   German   provinces  of  the  empire  in 

the  tenth  century,  became*  proselytes  soon  after- 
wards to  the  religion  of  Europe,  and  their  sovereign,  St. 
Stephen,  was  admitted  by  the  pope  into  the  list  of  Christian 
kings.  Though  the  Hungarians  were  of  a  race  perfectly 
distinct  from  either  the  Gothic  or  the  Sclavonian  tribes,  their 
system  of  government  wras  in  a  great  measure  analogous. 
None  indeed  could  be  more  natural  to  rude  nations  who  had 
but  recently  accustomed  themselves  to  settled  possessions, 
than  a  territorial  aristocracy,  jealous  of  unlimited  or  even 
hereditary  power  in  their  chieftain,  and  subjugating  the  infe- 
rior people  to  that  servitude  which,  in  such  a  state  of  society, 
is  the  unavoidable  consequence  of  poverty. 

The  marriage  of  an  Hungarian  princess  with  Charles  II 

(Leiifant;  Schmidt;  Coxe. 


Geiimany.  BATTLE  OF  WARNA.  581 

king  of  Naples,  eventually  connected  her  country  far  more 
than  it  had  been  with  the  affairs  of  Italy.  I  have  mentioned 
in  a  different  place  the  circumstances  which  led  to  the  inva- 
sion of  Naples  by  Louis  king  of  Hungary,  and  the  wars  of 
that  powerful  monarch  with  Venice.  By  marrying  the  eldest 
daughter  of  Louis,  Sigismund,  afterwards  emperor,  Sigismund. 
acquired  the  crown  of  Hungary,  which  upon  her  A,r'- 1392- 
death  without  issue  he  retained  in  his  own  right,  and  was  even 
able  to  transmit  to  the  child  of  a  second  marriage,  and  to  her 
husband  Albert  duke  of  Austria.  From  this  commencemeni 
is  deduced  the  connection  between  Hungary  and        ,,„„ 

ad    1437 

Austria.    In  two  years,  however,  Albert  dying  left 
his  widow  pregnant;  but  the  states  of  Hungary,  ^dl1s^8- 
jealous  of  Austrian  influence,  and  of  the  intrigues 
of  a  minority,  without  waiting  for  her  delivery,  bestowed  the 
crown  upon  Uladislaus  king  of  Poland.     The  birth  of  Albert's 
posthumous  son,  Ladislaus,  produced  an  opposition  in  behalf 
of  the  infant's  right ;  but  the  Austrian  party  turned  out  the 
weaker,  and  Uladislaus,  after  a  civil  war  of  some  duration, 
became    undisputed   king.       Meanwhile  a  more    formidable 
enemy    drew    near.     The    Turkish    arms    had   subdued    all 
Servia,   and  excited   a  just  alarm   throughout   Christendom. 
Uladislaus  led  a  considerable  force,  to  which  the  presence  of 
the  cardinal  Julian  gave  the  appearance  of  a  crusade,  into 
Bulgaria,  and,  after  several  successes,  concluded  an  Battle  of 
honorable  treaty  with  Amurath  II.     But   this  he  wama. 

.  ..AD    1111 

was  unhappily  persuaded  to  violate,  at  the  instiga- 
tion of  the  cardinal,  who  abhorred  the  impiety  of  keeping 
faith  with  infidels.1  Heaven  judged  of  this  otherwise,  if  the 
judgment  of  Heaven  was  pronounced  upon  the  field  of  Warna. 
In  that  fatal  battle  Uladislaus  was  killed,  and  the  Hungarians 
utterly  routed.  The  crown  was  now  permitted  to  rest  on  the 
head  of  young  Ladislaus  ;  but  the  regency  was  allotted  by 
the  states  of  Hungary  to  a  native  warrior,  John  Hunniades 
Hunniades.2     This   hero   stood  in  the  breach  for 

i  tineas  Sylvius  lays   this  perfidy  on  vius,   p.  398.)    And  the  Greeks  impute 

Pope  Eugenius  IV.      Scripsit   cardinal!,  the  same  to  him,  or  at  least  desertion  of 

nullum  valere  fiedus,  quod  se  inconsulto  his  troops,  at  Cossova,  where  he  was  de 

cum  hostibus  religionis  percussuin  esset,  feated  iu    1448.     (Spondanus,   ad    aim. 

p.  397.     The  words  in  italics  are  slipped  1448.)     Probably  he   was  one   of   those 

in,  to  give  a  slight  pretext  for  breaking  prudently  brave  men  who,  when  victory 

the  treaty.  is  out  of  their  power,  reserve  themselves 

2  Hunniades  was  a  Wallachian,  of  a  to  fight  another  day  :  which  is  the  char- 
small  family.  The  poles  charged  him  acter  of  all  partisans  accustomed  to 
with  cowardice  at  Warna.     (J5neas  Syl-  desultory  warfare.     This  is   the  apclJgy 


582  RELIEF   OF   BELGRADE.  Ciiai-.  V 

twelve  years  against  the  Turkish  power,  frequently  defeated 
but  unconquered  in  defeat.  If  the  renown  of  Hunniades  may 
Beem  exaggerated  by  the  partiality  of  writers  who  lived  under 
the  reign  of  his  son,  it  is  confirmed  by  more  unequivocal  evi- 
dence, by  the  dread  and  hatred  of  the  Turks,  whose  children 
were  taught  obedience  by  threatening  them  with  his  name, 
and  by  the  deference  of  a  jealous  aristocracy  to  a  man  of  no 
distinguished  birth.  He  surrendered  to  young  Ladislaus  a 
trust  that  he  had  exercised  with  perfect  fidelity;  but  his  merit 
was  too  great  to  be  forgiven,  and  the  court  never  treated  him 
with  cordiality.  The  last  and  the  most  splendid  service  of 
Relief  of  Hunniades  was  the  relief  of  Belgrade.  That  strong 
Belgrade.        city  was  besieged  by  Mahomet  II.  three  years  after 

the  fall  of  Constantinople  ;  its  capture  would  have 
laid  open  all  Hungary.  A  tumultuary  army,  chiefly  collected 
by  the  preaching  of  a  friar,  was  intrusted  to  Hunniades  :  he 
penetrated  into  the  city,  and,  having  repulsed  the  Turks  in  a 
fortunate  sally  wherein  Mahomet  was  wounded,  had  the  honor 
of  compelling  him  to  raise  the  siege  in  confusion.  The  relief 
of  Belgrade  was  more  important  in  its  effect  than  in  its  imme- 
diate circumstances.  It  revived  the  spirits  of  Europe,  which 
had  been  appalled  by  the  unceasing  victories  of  the  infidels. 
Mahomet  himself  seemed  to  acknowledge  the  importance  of 
the  blow,  and  seldom  afterwards  attacked  the  Hungarians. 
Hunniades  died  soon  after  this  achievement,  and  was  followed 
by  the  king  Ladislaus.1  The  states  of  Hungary,  although 
the  emperor  Frederic  III.  had  secured  to  himself,  as  he 
thought,  the  reversion,  were  justly  averse  to  his  character, 
Matthias  and  to  Austrian  connections.  They  conferred  their 
Corvinus.       crown  on  Matthias  Corvinus,  son  of  their  great 

Hunniades.  This  prince  reigned  above  thirty 
years  with  considerable  reputation,  to  which   his  patronage 

made  for  him   by  dSneas  Sylvius :   for-  amplified  this  original  authority  in  hii 

tasse  rei  militaris  perito  nulla  in  pugna  three  deeads  of  Hungarian  history, 

salus  visa,  et  salvare  aliquosquain  omnes  i  Ladislaus  died  at  Prague,  at  the  ag« 

perire  maluit.    Poloni  acceptam  eo prselio  of  twenty-two,   with   great  suspicion  of 

oladem  Hunniadis Tecordiee atque  ignaviaa  poison,   which    fell    chiefly    on    Georga 

tradiderunt ;  ipse  sua  concilia  spreta  con-  Podiebrad  and   the  Bohemians.     JBoeai 

quescusest.    I  observe  that  all  the  writers  Sylvius  was  with  him  at  the  time,  and  in 

upon  Hungarian  affairs  have  a  party  bias  a  letter  written  immediately  after  plainly 

one   way  or  other.     The  best    and  most  hints  this;  and  his  manner  carries  with 

authentic  account  of  Hunniades  seems  to  it  more  persuasion  than  if  he  had  spoken 

be,  still  allowing  for   this   partiality,  in  out.    Epist.  324.     Mr.  Coxe,  however,  in- 

the    chronicle     of    John    Thwroez,    who  forms   us  that  the  Bohemian    historian! 

lived    under    Matthias.       Bonfinius,  an  have  fully  disproved  the  charge. 
Italian  compiler  of  the  same   age,    has 


Germany.        EARLY   HISTORY   OF   SWITZERLAND.  583 

of  learned  men,  who  repaid  his  munificence  with  very  pro* 
fuse  eulogies,  did  not  a  little  contribute.1  Hungary,  at  least 
in  his  time,  was  undoubtedly  formidable  to  her  neighbors, 
and  held  a  respectable  rank  as  an  independent  power  in  the 
republic  of  Europe. 

The  kingdom   of  Burgundy  or  Aries   comprehended  ihe 
whole    mountainous   region  which  we  now  call  Switzerland. 
It  was  accordingly  reunited  to  the   Germanic  empire  by  the 
bequest  of  Rodolph  along  with  the  rest  of  his  dominions.    A 
numerous  and  ancient   nobility,  vassals  one  to  another,  or  to 
the  empire,  divided  the   possession  with  ecclesias-      . 
tical  lords  hardly  less  powerful  than  themselves. —its  early 
Of  the  former  we   find  the  counts  of  Zahringen,  ^^J^ 
Kyburg.  Hapsburg,  and  Tokenburg,  most  conspic- 
uous ;  of   the   latter,  the  bishop  of    Coire,  the  abbot  of  Si. 
Grail,  and    abbess  of  Seckingen.      Every  variety  of   feudal 
rights  was  early  found  and  long  preserved  in  Helvetia;  nor 
:.s  there  any  country  whose  history  better  illustrates  that  am- 
biguous relation,  half   property  and    half  dominion,  in  which 
the  territorial  aristocracy,  under  the  feudal  system,  stood  with 
respect  to  their  dependents.    In  the  twelfth  century  the  Swiss 
towns   rise  into   some   degree  of   importance.      Zurich   was 
eminent  for    commercial    activity,    and  seems   to    have   had 
no    lord  but    the    emperor.      Basle,   though    subject    to  its 
bishop,  possessed  the  usual  privileges  of  municipal  govern- 
ment.      Berne  and   Friburg,  founded  only  in  that   century, 
made  a  rapid  progress ;  and  the  latter  was  raised,  along  with 
Zurich,  by  Frederic  II.  in   1218,  to  the  rank  of  a  free  im- 
perial city.      Several   changes    in    the    principal   Helvetian 
families  took  place  in  the   thirteenth  century,  before  the  end 
of  which  the  house  of  Hapsburg,  under  the  politic  and  en- 
terprising Rodolph  and    his  son  Albert,  became   possessed, 
through  various   titles,   of   a  great  ascendency   in   Switzer- 
land.2 

Of  these  titles  none  was  more  tempting  to  an  ambitious 


l  Spondanus    frequently     blames    the  an  Italian  litterateur,  De  dictis  et  factis 

Italians,    who    received    pensions    from  Mathiae.  though  it  often  notices  an  ordi- 

Matthias,  or  wrote  at  his  court,  for  ex-  nary  saying  as  jocose  or  facete  dictum, 

aggerating    his   virtues,   or   dissembling  gives  a  favorable  impression  of  Matthias's 

his  misfortunes.     And  this  was  probably  ability,  and  also  of  his  integrity. 

the   case.        However,    Spondanus     has  -  Planta's    History     of    the     Helvetic 

rather  contracted  a  prejudice  against  the  Confederacy,  vol.  i  chaps.  2-5- 
Uorvini      A  treatise  of  Galeotus  Martius, 


584  THE  SWISS  Chap.  V 

Albert  of  chief  than  that  of  advocate  to  a  convent.  That 
Austria.  specious  name  conveyed  with  it  a  kind  of  indefi- 
nite guardianship,  and  right  of  interference,  which  fre- 
quently ended  in  reversing  the  conditions  of  the  ecclesiasti 
cat  sovereign  and  its  vassal.  But  during  times  of  feudal 
anarchy  there  was  perhaps  no  other  means  to  secure  the  rich 
abbeys  from  absolute  spoliation  ;  and  the  free  cities  in  their 
early  stage  sometimes  adopted  the  same  policy.  Among 
other  advocacies,  Albert  obtained  that  of  some 
convents  which  had  estates  in  the  valleys  of 
Schweitz  and  Underwald.  These  sequestered  regions  in 
the  heart  of  the  Alps  had  been  for  ages  the  habitation  of 
a  pastoral  race,  so  happily  forgotten,  or  so  inaccessible  in 
their  fastnesses,  as  to  have  acquired  a  virtual  independence, 
regulating  their  own  affairs  in  their  general  assembly  with 
a  perfect  equality,  though  they  acknowledged  the  sovereignty 
of  the  empire.1  The  people  of  Schweitz  had  made  Rodolph 
their  advocate.  They  distrusted  Albert,  whose  succession  to 
his  father's  inheritance  spread  alarm  through  Helvetia.  It 
soon  appeared  that  their  suspicions  were  well  founded.  Be- 
sides the  local  rights  which  his  ecclesiastical  advocacies  gave 
him  over  part  of  the  forest  cantons,  he  pretended,  after  his 
election  to  the  empire,  to  send  imperial  bailiffs  into  their  val- 
leys, as  administrators  of  criminal  justice.  Their  oppression 
of  a  people  unused  to  control,  whom  it  was  plainly  the  design 
of  Albert  to  reduce  into  servitude,  excited  those  generous  emo- 
tions of  resentment  which  a  brave  and  simple  race  have  sel- 
Their  insur-  dom  the  discretion  to  repress.  Three  men,  Stauf- 
rection.  facher  of  Schweitz,  Furst  of  Uri,  Melchthal  of 

Underwald,  each  with  ten  chosen  associates,  met  by  night  in 
a  sequestered  field,  and  swore  to  assert  the  common  cause  of 
their  liberties,  without  bloodshed  or  injury  to  the  rights  of 
others.  Their  success  was  answerable  to  the  justice  of  their 
undertaking ;  the  three  cantons  unanimously  took  up  arms, 
and  expelled  their  oppressors  without  a  contest.  Albert's 
assassination  by  his  nephew,  which  followed  soon 
afterwards,  fortunately  gave  them  leisure  to  con- 
solidate their  union.2  He  was  succeeded  in  the  empire  by 
Henry  VII.,  jealous  of  the  Austrian  family,  and   not  at  all 


1  Planta'8  History  of  the  Helvetic  Confederacy,  vol.  i.  o.  4. 
a  Planta,  c.  6 


fiEBMAjnr. 


SWISS   CONFEDERACY.  585 


displeased  at  proceedings  which  had  been  accompanied  with 
so  little  violence  or  disrespect  for  the  empire.  But  Leopold 
duke  of  Austria,  resolved  to  humble  the  peasants  who  had 
rebelled  against  his  father,  led  a  considerable  force  into  their 
country.  °The  Swiss,  commending  themselves  to  Heaven, 
and  determined  rather  to  perish  than  undergo  that  yoke  a 
second  time,  though  ignorant  of  regular  discipline,  Battle  of 
and  unprovided  with  defensive  armor,  utterly  dis-  Morten 
comfitted  the  assailants  at  Morgarten.1 

This  great  victory,  the  Marathon  of  Switzerland,  confirmed 
the  independence  of  the  three  original  cantons.     After  some 
years,  Lucerne,  contiguous  in   situation  and  alike  Formationof 
in  interests,  was   incorporated   into  their    confed-  s^ssCon- 
eracy.     It  was  far  more  materially  enlarged  about 
the  middle  of   the  fourteenth  century,  by  the  accession  of 
Zurich,  Glaris,  Zug,  and  Berne,  all  which  took  place  within 
two  years.     The  first  and  last  of  these  cities  had  already 
been  engaged  in  frequent  wars  with  the  Helvetian  nobility, 
and  then-  internal  polity  was  altogether  republican.2     They 
acquired,  not  independence,  which  they  already  enjoyed,  but 
additional  security,  by  this  union  with  the  Swiss,  properly  so 
called,  who  in  deference  to  their  power  and  reputation  ceded 
to  them  the  first  rank   in  the  league.     The  eight  already 
enumerated  are  called  the  ancient  cantons,  and  continued,  till 
the  late  reformation  of  the  Helvetic  system,  to  possess  several 
distinctive  privileges  and  even  rights  of  sovereignty  over  sub- 
ject territories,  in  which  the  five  cantons  of  Friburg,  Soleure, 
Basle,  Schaffhausen,  and  Appenzell  did  not  participate.    From 
this  time  the  united  cantons,  but   especially  those  of  Berne 
and  Zurich,  began  to  extend  their  territories  at  the  expense 
of   the   rural   nobility.      The  same    contest   between   these 
parties,  with  the  same  termination,  which  we  know  generally 
to  have  taken  place  in  Lombardy  during  the  eleventh  and 
twelfth  centuries,  may  be  traced  with  more  minuteness  in 
the   annals  of   Switzerland.8     Like  the  Lombards,  too,  the 
Helvetic  cities  acted  with  policy  and  moderation  towards  the 
nobles  whom  they  overcame,  admitting  them  to  the  franchises 
of  their  community  as  co-burghers  (a  privilege  which  vir- 
tually implied  a  defensive  alliance  against  any  assailant),  and 
uniformly  respecting  the    legal    rights  of  property.     Many 

ipianta,c.7.  2  Id.  cc.  8,  9  3  Id.   c.  IT). 


586  SWISS   CONFEDERACY  Chap.  V 

feudal  superiorities  they  obtained  from  the  owners  in  a  mora 
peaceable  manner,  through  purchase  or  mortgage.  Thus  the 
house  of  Austria,  to  which  the  extensive  domains  of  the 
counts  of  Kvburg  had  devolved,  abandoning,  after  repeated 
defeats,  its  hopes  of  subduing  the  forest  cantons,  alienated  a 
great  part  of  its  possessions  to  Zurich  and  Berne.1  And  the 
last  remnant  of  their  ancient  Helvetic  territories  in  Ar^ovia 
was  wrested  in  1117  from  Frederic  count  of  Tyrol,  who,  im- 
prudently supporting  pope  John  XXTTI.  against  the  council 
of  Constance,  had  been  put  to  the  ban  of  the  empire.  These 
conquests  Berne  could  hot  be  induced  to  restore,  and  thus 
completed  the  independence  of  the  confederate  republics.2 
The  other  free  cities,  though  not  yet  incorporated,  and  the 
few  remaining  nobles,  whether  lay  or  spiritual,  of  whom  the 
abbot  of  St.  Gall  was  the  principal,  entered  into  separate 
leagues  with  different  cantons.  Switzerland  became,  there- 
fore, in  the  first  part  of  the  fifteenth  century,  a  free  country, 
acknowledged  as  such  by  neighboring  states,  and  subject  to 
no  external  control,  though  still  comprehended  within  the 
nominal    sovereignty  of  the  empire. 

The  affairs  of  Switzerland  occupy  a  very  small  space  in 
the  great  chart  of  European  history.  But  in  some  respects 
they  are  more  interesting  than  the  revolutions  of  mighty 
Kingdoms.  Nowhere  besides  do  we  find  so  many  titles  to  our 
sympathy,  or  the  union  of  so  much  virtue  with  so  complete 
success.  In  the  Italian  republics  a  more  splendid  temple 
may  seem  to  have  been  erected  to  liberty ;  but,  as  we  ap- 
proach, the  serpents  of  faction  hiss  around  her  altar,  and  the 
form  of  tyranny  flits  among  the  distant  shadows  behind  the 
shrine.  Switzerland,  not  absolutely  blameless,  (for  what  re- 
public has  been  so?)  but  comparatively  exempt  from  turbu- 
lence, usurpation,  and  injustice,  has  well  deserved  to  employ 
the  native  pen  of  an  historian  accounted  the  most  eloquent  of 
the  last  age.8     Other  nations  displayed  an  insuperable  resolu- 

1  Planta,  e.  11.  ation  in  a  modern  historian  of  distant 

2  Id.  vol.  ii.  c.  1.  times.     But  I  must  observe  that,  if  the 

3  I  am  unacquainted  with  Muller's  authentic  chronicles  of  Switzerland  have 
history  in  the  original  language;  hut,  enabled  Muller  to  embellish  hia  narra- 
prcsiiiiiing  the  first  volume  of  Mr.  Plan-  tion  with  so  much  circumstantial  de- 
cays History  of  the  Helvetic  Confederacy  tail,  he  has  been  remarkably  fortunate 
to  be  a  free  translation  or  abridgment  of  in  his  authorities.  No  man  could  write 
it,  1  can  well  conceive  that  it  deserves  the  the  annals  of  England  or  France  in  the 
encomiums  of  Madame  de  StaSl  and  other  fourteenth  century  with  such  particu- 
foreign  critics.  It  is  very  rare  to  meet  larity,  if  he  was  scrupulous  not  to  fill  up 
*lth  such  picturesque  and  lively  deline-  the    meagre   sketch  of  chroniclers  from 


Germany.  SWISS   TROOPS.  587 

tion  in  the  defence  of  walled  towns  ;  but  the  steadiness  of  the 
Swiss  in  the  field  of  battle  was  without  a  parallel,  unless  we 
recall  the  memory  of  Lacedaemon.  It  was  even  established 
as  a  law,  that  whoever  returned  from  battle  after  a  defeat 
should  forfeit  his  life  by  the  hands  of  the  executioner.  Six- 
teen hundred  men,  who  had  been  sent  to  oppose  a  predatory 
invasion  of  the  French  in  1444,  though  they  might  have  re- 
treated without  loss,  determined  rather  to  perish  on  the  spot, 
and  fell  amidst  a  far  greater  heap  of  the  hostile  slain.1  At 
the  famous  battle  of  Sempaeh  in  1385,  the  last  which  Aus- 
tria presumed  to  try  against  the  forest  cantons,  the  enemy's 
knights,  dismounted  from  their  horses,  presented  an  impreg- 
nable barrier  of  lances,  which  disconcerted  the  Swiss  ;  till 
Winkelried,  a  gentleman  of  Underwald,  commending  his  wife 
and  children  to  his  countrymen,  threw  himself  upon  the  op- 
posite ranks,  and  collecting  as  many  lances  as  he  could  grasp, 
forced  a  passage  for  his  followers  by  burying  them  in  his 
bosom.2 

The  burghers  and  peasants  of  Switzerland,  ill  provided 
<vith  cavalry,  and  better  able  to  dispense  with  it  Excellence 
than  the  natives  of  champaign  countries  may  be  of  the  Swiss 
deemed  the  principal  restorers  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  tactics,  which  place  the  strength  of  armies  in  a  steady 
mass  of  infantry.  Besides  their  splendid  victories  over  the 
dukes  of  Austria  and  their  own  neighboring  nobility,  they 
had  rejmlsed,  in  the  year  1375,  one  of  those  predatory  bodies 
of  troops,  the  scourge  of  Europe  in  that  age,  and  to  whose 
licentiousness  kingdoms  and  free  states  yielded  alike  a  passive 
submission.  They  gave  the  dauphin,  afterwards  Louis  XL, 
who  entered  their  country  in  1444  with  a  similar  body  of 
ruffians,  called  Armagnacs,  the  disbanded  mercenaries  of  the 
English  war,  sufficient  reason  to  desist  from  his  invasion  and 
to  respect  their  valor.  That  able  prince  formed  indeed  so 
high  a  notion  of  the  Swiss,  that  he  sedulously  cultivated  their 
alliance  during  the  rest  of  his  life.  He  was  made  abundantly 
sensible  of  the  wisdom  of  this  policy  when  he  saw  his  greatest 
enemy,  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  routed  at  Granson  and  Morat, 
and  his  affairs  irrecoverably  ruined,  by  these  hardy  repub- 


the  stores  of  his  invention.     The  striking    another   advantage  as  a,  painter  of  his- 
scenery  of.  Switzerland,  and  Muller's  ex-     tory. 
w;t  acquaintance  with  it,  have  given  him         i  Flanta,  vol.  ii.  c.  2. 

2  Td.  vol.  i.  c.  10. 


588  RATIFICATION   OF  CiiAr.  V. 

licans.  The  ensuing  age  is  the  most  conspicuous,  though  not 
(he  most  essentially  glorious,  in  the  history  of  Switzerland. 
Courted  for  the  excellence  of  their  troops  by  the  rival 
sovereigns  of  Europe,  and  themselves  too  sensible  both  to 
ambitious  schemes  of  dominion  and  to  the  thirst  of  money, 
the  united  cantons  came  to  play  a  very  prominent  part  in  the 
wars  of  Lombardv,  with  great  military  renown,  but  not 
without  some  impeachment  of  that  sterling  probity  which  had 
distinguished  their  earlier  efforts  for  independence.  These 
events,  however,  do  not  fall  within  my  limits ;  but  the  last 

year  of  the  fifteenth  century  is  a  leading  epoch, 
JE;  with  which  I  shall  close  this  sketch.  Though  the 
dependence     house  of  Austria  had  ceased  to  menace  the  liberties 

of  Helvetia,  and  had  even  been  for  many  years  its 
ally,  the  emperor  Maximilian,  aware  of  the  important  service 
he  might  derive  from  the  cantons  in  his  projects  upon  Italy, 
as  well  as  of  the  disadvantage  he  sustained  by  their  partiality 
to  French  interest,  endeavored  to  revive  the  unextinguished 
supremacy  of  the  empire.  That  supremacy  had  just  been 
restored  in  Germany  by  the  establishment  of  the  Imperial 
Chamber,  and  of  a  regular  pecuniary  contribution  for  its 
support,  as  well  as  for  other  purposes,  in  the  diet  of  Worms. 
The  Helvetic  cantons  were  summoned  to  yield  obedience  to 
these  imperial  laws  ;  an  innovation,  for  such  the  revival  of 
obsolete  prerogatives  must  be  considered,  exceedingly  hostile 
to  their  republican  independence,  and  involving  consequences 
not  less  material  in  their  eyes,  the  abandonment  of  a  line 
of  policy,  which  tended  to  enrich,  if  not  to  aggrandize  them. 
Their  refusal  to  comply  brought  on  a  war,  wherein  the 
Tyrolese  subjects  of  Maximilian,  and  the  Suabian  league,  a 
confederacy  of  cities  in  that  province  lately  formed  under  the 
emperor's  auspices,  were  principally  engaged  against  the 
Swiss.  But  the  success  of  the  latter  was  decisive  ;  and  after 
a  terrible  devastation  of  the  frontiers  of  Germany,  peace  was 
concluded  upon  terms  very  honorable  for  Switzerland.  The 
cantons  were  declared  free  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Impe- 
rial Chamber,  and  from  all  contributions  imposed  by  the  diet. 
Their  right  to  enter  into  foreign  alliance,  even  hostile  to  the 
empire,  if  it  was  not  expressly  recognized,  continued  unim- 
paired in  practice  ;  nor  am  I  aware  that  they  were  at  any 
time  afterwards  supposed  to  incur  the  crime  of  rebellion  by 
such  proceedings.     Though,  perhaps,  in    the   strictest  letter 


Germany.  SWISS   1NDEPKND.UNCK.  589 

* 
of  public  law,  the  Swiss  cantons  were  not  absolutely  released 
from  their  subjection  to  the  empire  until  the  treaty  of  West- 
phalia, their  real  sovereignty  must  be  dated  by  an  historian 
from  the  year  when  every  prerogative  which  a  government 
can  exercise  was  finally  abandoned.1 

i  Want*.  TAt.  I!,  o.  4 


5 'JO  30MMENCEMEN1   OF  MODKRJS  HISTORT    Cv*w   v* 


CHAPTER    Vj. 

HISTORY    OF    THE    GREEKS    AND    SARACENS. 

aise  of  Mohammedism  — Causes  of  its  Success  —  Progress  of  Saracen  Arms  —  Greek 
Empire  —  Decline  of  the  Khalifs  —  The  Greeks  recover  Part  of  their  Losses  —  The 
Turks  —  The  Crusades  —  Capture  of  Constantinople  by  the  Latins  —  Its  Recovery 
by  the  Greeks  —  The  Moguls  —  The  Ottomans — Danger  at  Constantinople  — 
Timur  —  Capture  of  Constantinople  by  Mahomet  II.  — Alarm  of  Europe. 

The  difficulty  which  occurs  to  us  in  endeavoring  to  fix  a 
natural  commencement  of  modern  history  even  in  the  Western 
countries  of  Europe  is  much  enhanced  when  we  direct  our 
attention  to  the  Eastern  empire.  In  tracing  the  long  series 
of  the  Byzantine  annals  we  never  lose  sight  of  antiquity ; 
the  Greek  language,  the  Roman  name,  the  titles,  the  laws, 
all  the  shadowy  circumstance  of  ancient  greatness,  attend  us 
throughout  the  progress  from  the  first  to  the  last  of  the,  Con- 
stantines ;  and  it  is  only  when  we  observe  the  external 
condition  and  relations  of  their  empire,  that  we  perceive 
ourselves  to  be  embarked  in  a  new  sea,  and  are  compelled  to 
deduce,  from  points  of  bearing  to  the  history  of  other  nations, 
a  line  of  separation  which  the  domestic  revolutions  of  Con- 
stantinople would  not  satisfactorily  afford.  The  appearance 
of  Mohammed,  and  the  conquests  of  his  disciples,  present  an 
epoch  in  the  history  of  Asia  still  more  important  and  more 
definite  'ban  the  subversion  of  the  Roman  empire  in  Europe; 
and  he  ace  the  boundary-line  between  the  ancient  and  modern 
divisions  of  Byzantine  history  will  intersect  the  reign  of  He- 
racliuj.  That  prince  may  be  said  to  have  stood  on  the  verge 
of  both  hemispheres  of  time,  whose  youth  was  crowned  with 
the  last  victories  over  the  successors  of  Artaxerxes,  and 
whose  age  was  clouded  by  the  first  calamities  of  Moham- 
medan invasion. 

Of  all  the  revolutions  which  have  had  a  permanent  influ- 
.  ence  upon  the  civil  history  of  mankind,  none  could 

Appearance  r  J 

of  Moham-      <o  little  be  anticipated  by  hur;  uin  prudence  as  that 

effected  by  the  religion  of  Arabia.     As  the   seeds 

of  invisible  disease  grow  up  sometimes  in  silence  to  maturity, 


Greeks,  etc.        APPEARANCE   OF   MAHOMMED.  591 

till  they  manifest  themselves  hopeless  and  irresistible,  the 
gradual  propagation  of  a  new  faith  in  a  barbarous  country 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  empire  was  hardly  known  perhaps, 
and  certainly  disregarded,  in  the  court  of  Constantinople. 
Arabia,  in  the  age  of  Mohammed,  was  divided  into  many 
small  states,  most  of  which,  however,  seem  to  have  looked 
up  to  Mecca  as  the  capital  of  their  naliuii  and  the  chief  seat 
of  their  religious  worship.  The  capture  of  that  city  accord- 
ingly, and  subjugation  of  its  powerful  and  numerous  aris- 
tocracy, readily  drew  after  it  the  submission  of  the  minor 
tribes,  who  transferred  to  the  conqueror  the  reverence  they 
were  used  to  show  to  those  he  had  subdued.  If  we  consider 
Mohammed  only  as  a  military  usurper,  there  is  nothing  more 
explicable  or  more  analogous,  especially  to  the  course  of 
oriental  history,  than  his  success.  But  as  the  author  of  a 
religious  imposture,  upon  which,  though  avowedly  unattested 
by  miraculous  powers,  and  though  originally  discountenanced 
by  the  civil  magistrate,  he  had  the  boldness  to  found  a  scheme 
of  universal  dominion,  which  his  followers  were  half  enabled 
to  realize,  it  is  a  curious  speculation  by  what  means  he  could 
inspire  so  sincere,  so  ardent,  so  energetic,  and  so  permanent 
a  belief. 

A  full  explanation  of  the  causes  which  contributed  to  the 
progress  of  Mohammedism  is  not  perhaps,  at  causes  of 
present,  attainable  by  those  most  conversant  with  his  success, 
this  department  of  literature.1  But  we  may  point  out  several 
of  leading  importance  :  in  the  first  place,  those  just  and  elevated 
notions  of  the  divine  nature  and  of  moral  duties,  the  gold-ore 
that  pervades  the  dross  of  the  Koran,  which  were  calculated 
to  strike  a  serious  and  reflecting  people,  already  perhaps  dis- 
inclined, by  intermixture  with  their  Jewish  and  Christian 
fellow-citizens,  to  the  superstitions  of  their  ancient  idolatry ;  '2 
next,  the  artful  incorporation  of  tenets,  usages,  and  traditions 


1  We  are  very  destitute  of  satisfactory  prophet,  except  as  it  is  deducible  from 

materials  for  the  history  of  Mohammed  the  Koran. 

himself.      Abulfeda,  the  most  judicious  -  The  very  curious  romance  of  Antar 

of  his  biogi-aphers,  lived  in  the  fourteenth  written,  perhaps,  before  the  appearanc 

century,  when  it  must  have  been  mor-  of  Mohammed,  seems  to  render  it  proba 

ally  impossible  to  discriminate  the  truth  ble    that,    however    idolatry,    as    we    are 

amidst  the  torrent  of  fabulous  tradition,  told  by  Sale,  might  prevail  in  some  part9 

Al  Jannabi,  whom  Gagnier  translated,  is  of  Arabia,   yet  the  genuine  religion   of 

a   mere    legend   writer  ;  it    would    be   as  the  descendants  of  Ishmael  was  a  belief 

rational  to  rely  on    the  Acta  Sanctorum  in   the  unity  of  Ood  as  strict  as  i?  laid 

as  his  romance.     It  is  therefore  difficult  down  in  the  Koran  itself,  and  accomra- 

to    ascertain  the    real  character  of    the  nicd  by  the  same  antipathy,  partly  re- 


592  CAUSES   OF  THE  Chap.  VI 

from  the  various  religions  that  existed  in  Arabia;1  and 
thirdly,  the  extensive  application  of  the  precepts  in  the 
Koran,  a  book  confessedly  written  with  much  elegance  and 
purity,  to  all  legal  transactions  and  all  the  business  of  life. 
It  may  be  expected  that  I  should  add  to  these  what  is  com- 
monly considered  as  a  distinguishing  mark  of  Mohammedism, 
its  indulgence  to  voluptuousness.  But  this  appears  to  be 
greatly  exaggerated.  Although  the  character  of  its  founder 
may  have  been  tainted  by  sensuality  as  well  as  ferociousness, 
I  do  not  think  that  he  relied  upon  inducements  of  the  former 
kind  for  the  diffusion  of  his  system.  We  are  not  to  judge 
of  this  by  rules  of  Christian  purity,  or  of  European  practice. 
If  polygamy  was  a  prevailing  usage  in  Arabia,  as  is  not 
questioned,  its  permission  gave  no  additional  license  to  the 
proselytes  of  Mohammed,  who  will  be  found  rather  to  have 
narrowed  the  unbounded  liberty  of  oriental  manners  in  this 
respect ;  while  his  decided  condemnation  of  adultery,  and  of 
incestuous  connections,  so  frequent  among  barbarous  nations, 
does  not  argue  a  very  lax  and  accommodating  morality.  A 
devout  Mussulman  exhibits  much  more  of  the  Stoical  than 
the  Epicurean  character.  Nor  can  any  one  read  the  Koran 
without  being  sensible  that  it  breathes  an  austere  and  scrupu- 
lous spirit.  And,  in  fact,  the  founder  of  a  new  religion  or 
sect  is  little  likely  to  obtain  permanent  success  by  indulging 
the  vices  and  luxuries  of  mankind.  I  should  rather  be  dis- 
posed to  reckon  the  severity  of  Mohammed's  discipline  among 
the  causes  of  its  influence.  Precepts  of  ritual  observance,  being 
always  definite  and  unequivocal,  are  less  likely  to  be  neglected, 
after  their  obligation  has  been  acknowledged,  than  thos«  of 

lisrjous,  partly  national,  towards  the  are  to  be  found  in  the  Koran,  but  «spe- 
Fire-worshippers  which  Mohammed  in-  cially  that  of  Arianisru.  No  out  who 
culcated.  This  corroborates  what  I  had  knows  what  Ariauism  is,  and  what  Mo- 
said  in  the  text  before  the  publication  of  hammedism  is.  could  possible-  fall  ii»to  so 
that  work.  strange  an  error.  The  misfortune  ha* 
1  I  am  very  much  disposed  to  believe,  been,  that  the  learned  writer.  whil»  ac 
notwithstanding  what  seems  to  be  the  cumulating  a  mass  of  reading  upon  this 
general  opinion,  that  Mohammed  had  part  of  his  subject,  neglected  what  should 
never  read  any  part  of  the  New  Testa-  have  been  the  7iur!eus  of  the  whole,  a  pe- 
ment.  His  knowledge  of  Christianity  rusal  of  the  single  book  which  contains 
appears  to  be  wholly  derived  from  the  the  doctrine  of  the  Arabian  impostor, 
apocryphal  gospels  and  similar  works.  Tn  this  strange  chimera  about  the  Arian- 
He  admitted  the  miraculous  conception  ism  of  Hohammed,  he  hafl  been  led  away 
and  prophetic  character  of  Jesus,  but  not  by  a  misplaced  trust  in  Whitaker;  a 
his  divinity  or  preexistence.  Hence  it  writer  almost  invariably  in  the  wrong, 
is  rather  surprising  to  read,  in  a  popular  and  whose  bad  reasoning  opou  all  the 
book  of  sermons  by  a  living  prelate,  that  points  of  historical  eriticism  which  ht 
all  the  heresies  of  the  Christian  church  attempted  to  discuss  is  quite  notorio^^ 
(I  quote   the   substance  from    memory) 


Greeks,  etc.  SUCCESS   OF  MAHOMMED.  503 

moral  virtue.  Thus  the  long  fasting,  the  pilgrimages,  the 
regular  prayers  and  ablutions,  the  constant  alms-giving,  the 
abstinence  from  stimulating  liquors,  enjoined  by  the  Koran, 
created  a  visible  standard  of  practice  among  its  followers, 
and  preserved  a  continual  recollection  of  their  law. 

But  the  prevalence  of  Islam  in  the  lifetime  of  its  prophet, 
and  during  the  first  ages  of  its  existence,  was  chiefly  owing 
to  the  spirit  of  martial  energy  that  he  infused  into  it.  The 
religion  of  Mohammed  is  as  essentially  a  military  system  as 
the  institution  of  chivalry  in  the  west  of  Europe.  The  peo- 
ple of  Arabia,  a  race  of  strong  passions  and  sanguinary 
temper,  inured  to  habits  of  pillage  and  murder,  found  in  the 
law  of  their  native  prophet,  not  a  license,  but  a  command,  to 
desolate  the  world,  and  the  promise  of  all  that  their  glowing 
imaginations  could  anticipate  of  Paradise  annexed  to  all  in 
which  they  most  delighted  upon  earth.  It  is  difficult  for  us 
in  the  calmness  of  our  closets  to  conceive  that  feverish  inten- 
sity of  excitement  to  which  man  may  be  wrought,  when  the 
animal  and  intellectual  energies  of  his  nature  converge  to  a 
point,  and  the  buoyancy  of  strength  and  courage  reciprocates 
the  influence '  of  moral  sentiment  or  religious  hope.  The 
effect  of  this  union  I  have  formerly  remarked  in  the  Cru- 
sades ;  a  phenomenon  perfectly  analogous  to  the  early  history 
of  the  Saracens.  In  each,  one.  hardly  knows  whether  most 
to  admire  the  prodigious  exertions  of  heroism,  or  to  revolt 
from  the  ferocious  bigotry  that  attended  them.  But  the 
Crusades  were  a  temporary  effort,  not  thoroughly  congenial 
to  the  spirit  of  Christendom,  which,  even  in  the  darkest  and 
most  superstitious  ages,  was  not  susceptible  of  the  solitary 
and  overruling  fanaticism  of  the  Moslem.  They  needed  no 
excitement  from  pontiffs  and  preachers  to  achieve  the  work 
to  which  they  were  called ;  the  precept  was  in  their  law,  the 
principle  was  in  their  hearts,  the  assurance  of  success  was  in 
their  swords.  "  0  prophet,"  exclaimed  Ali,  when  Moham- 
med, in  the  first  years  of  his  mission,  sought  among  the 
scanty  and  hesitating  assembly  of  his  friends  a  vizir  and 
lieutenant  in  command,  "  I  am  the  man ;  whoever  rises 
against  thee,  I  will  da>h  out  his  teeth,  tear  out  his  eyes, 
break  his  legs,  rip  up  his  belly.  O  prophet,  I  will  be  thy 
vizir  over  them."  1     These  words  of  Mohammed's  early  and 

i  Gibbon,  vol.  ix.  p.  284- 
VOL    I. — M.  38 


594  CONQUESTS   OF  THE  SARACENS.  ('n.vi.Vl 

illustrious  disciple  are,  as  it  wer<  .  a  text,  upon  which  the 
commentary  expands  into  the  whole  Saracenic  history. 
They  contain  the  vital  essence  of  his  religion,  implicit  faith 
and  ferocious  energy.  Death,  slavery,  tribute  to  unbelievers, 
were  the  glad  tidings  of  the  Arabian  prophet.  To  the 
idolaters,  indeed,  or  those  who  acknowledged  no  special  reve- 
lation, one  alternative  only  was  proposed,  conversion  or  the 
sword.  The  people  of  the  Book,  as  they  are  termed  in  the 
Koran,  or  four  sects  of  Christians,  Jews,  Magians,  and  Sa- 
bians,  were  permitted  to  redeem  their  adherence  to  their 
ancient  law  by  the  payment  of  tribute,  and  other  marks  of 
humiliation  and  servitude.  But  the  limits  which  Moham- 
medan intolerance  had  prescribed  to  itself  were  seldom 
transgressed ;  the  word  pledged  to  unbelievers  was  seldom 
forfeited ;  and  with  all  their  insolence  and  oppression,  the 
Moslem  conquerors  were  mild  and  liberal  in  comparison 
with  those  who  obeyed  the  pontiffs  of  Rome  or  Constanti- 
nople. 

At  the  death  of   Mohammed   in   632   his   temporal  and 
religious   sovereignty   embraced,  and  was  limited 

First  • 

conquests  by,  the  Arabian  peninsula.  The  Roman  and 
Saracens  Persian  empires,  engaged  in  tedious  and  indeci- 
sive hostility  upon  the  rivers  of  Mesopotamia 
and  the  Armenian  mountains,  were  viewed  by  the  ambitious 
fanatics  of  his  creed  as  their  quarry.  In  the  very  first  year 
of  Mohammed's  immediate  successor,  Abubeker,  each  of 
these  mighty  empires  was  invaded.  The  latter  opposed  but 
a  short  resistance.  The  crumbling  fabric  of  eastern  despot- 
ism is  never  secure  against  rapid  and  total  subversion ;  a 
few  victories,  a  few  sieges,  carried  the  Arabian  arms  from 
the  Tigris  to  the  Oxus,  and  overthrew,  with  the  Sassanian 
dynasty,  the  ancient  and  famous  religion  they  had  professed. 
Seven  years  of  active  and  unceasing  warfare  sufficed  to  sub- 

a.d.  jngate  the  rich  province  of  Syria,  though  defended 

632-639.  jjy  numer0U;i  armies  and  fortified  cities ;  and  the 
khalif  Omar  had  scarcely  returned  thanks  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  this  conquest,  when  Amrou,  his  lieutenant, 
announced  to  him  the  entire  reduction  of  Egypt.  After 
some  interval  the   Saracens  won   their  way  along  the  coast 

a.d.  of  Africa  as  far  as  the  Pillars  of  Hercules,  and 

647-698.  a  third  province  was  irretrievably  torn  from  the 
Greek  empire.     These   western   conquests  introduced  them 


Greeks,  etc.      STATE  OF   THE  GREEK   EMPIRE.  595 

to  fresh  enemies,  and  ushered  in  more  splendid  successes ; 
encouraged  by  the  disunion  of  the  Visigoths,  and  perhaps 
invited  by  treachery,  Musa,  the  general  of  a  master  who  sat 
beyond  the  opposite  extremity  of  the  Mediterra-  710 
uean  Sea,  passed  over  into  Spain,  and  within 
about  two  years  the  name  of  Mohammed  was  invoked  under 
the  Pyrenees.1 

These  conquests,  which  astonish  the  careless  and  superfi- 
cial, are  less  perplexing  to  a  calm  inquirer  than  their  cessation 
the  loss  of  half  the  Roman  empire,  than  the  preservation  of 
the  rest.  A  glance  from  Medina  to  Constantinople  gtate  of 
in  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century  would  proba-  the  Greek 
bly  have  induced  an  indifferent  spectator,  if  such  empire- 
a  being  may  be  imagined,  to  anticipate  by  eight  hundred 
years  the  establishment  of  a  Mohammedan  dominion  upon 
the  shores  of  the  Hellespont.  The  fame  of  Ileraclius  had 
withered  in  the  Syrian  war ;  and  his  successors  appeared  as 
incapable  to  resist,  as  they  were  unworthy  to  govern.  Their 
despotism,  unchecked  by  law,  was  often  punished  by  success- 
ful rebellion  ;  but  not  a  whisper  of  civil  liberty  was  ever 
heard,  and  the  vicissitudes  of  servitude  and  anarchy  consum- 
mated the  moral  degeneracy  of  the  nation.  Less  ignorant  than 
the  western  barbarians,  the  Greeks  abused  their  ingenuity 
in  theological  controversies,  those  especially  which  related  to 
the  nature  and  incarnation  of  our  Saviour;  wherein  the  dis- 
putants, as  is  usual,  became  more  positive  and  rancorous  as 
their  creed  receded  from  the  possibility  of  human  apprehen- 
sion. Nor  were  these  confined  to  the  clergy,  who  had  not,  in 
the  East,  obtained  the  prerogative  of  guiding  the  national 
faith  ;  the  sovereigns  sided  alternately  with  opposing  factions; 
Heraclius  was  not  too  brave,  nor  Theodora  too  infamous,  for 
discussions  of  theology;  and  the  dissenters  from  an  imperial 
decision  were  involved  in  the  double  proscription  of  treason 
and  heresy.  But  the  persecutors  of  their  opponents  at  home 
pretended  to  cowardly  scrupulousness  in  the  field ;  nor  was 

1  Ockley?s  History  of  the  Saracens;  trary,  it  maybe  laid  down  as  a  pretty 
Cardonne,  Revolutions  de  l'Afrique  et  general  rule,  that  circumstantiality, 
de  l'Espagne.  The  former  of  these  works  which  enhances  the  credibility  of  a  wit- 
is  well  known  and  justly  admired  for  ness,  diminishes  that  of  an  historian  re- 
its  simplicity  and  picturesque  details,  mote  in  time  or  situation.  And  I  observe 
Scarcely  any  narrative  has  ever  excelled  that  Keiske,  in  his  preface  to  Abulfeda, 
in  beauty  that  of  the  death  of  Hossein.  speaks  of  Wakidi,  from  whom  Ockley'i 
But  these  do  not  tend  to  render  it  more  book  is  but  a  translation,  as  a  mere  fab< 
deserving  of  confidence.      On    the  con-  ulist. 


596  DECLINE  OF  THE  SARACENS.      Chap  Vi 

the  Greek  church  ashamed  to  require  the  lustration  of  a 
canonical  penance  from  the  soldier  who  shed  the  blood  of  his 
enemies  in  a  national  war. 

But  this  depraved  people  were  preserved  from  destruction 
Decline  D7  tne  vices  of  their  enemies,  still  more  than  by 

of  the  some  intrinsic  resources  which  they  yet  possessed. 

A  rapid  degeneracy  enfeebled  the  victorious  Mos- 
lem in  their  career.  That  irresistible  enthusiasm,  that  earnest 
and  disinterested  zeal  of  the  companions  of  Mohammed,  was 
in  a  great  measure  lost,  even  before  the  first  generation  had 
passed  away.  In  the  fruitful  valleys  of  Damascus  and  Bas- 
sora  the  Arabs  of  the  desert  forgot  their  abstemious  habits. 
Rich  from  the  tributes  of  an  enslaved  people,  the  Mohamme- 
dan sovereigns  knew  no  employment  of  riches  but  in  sensual 
luxury,  and  paid  the  price  of  voluptuous  indulgence  in  the 
relaxation  of  their  strength  and  energy.  Under  the  reign  of 
Moawiah,  the  fifth  khalif,  an  hereditary  succession  was  sub- 
stituted for  the  free  choice  of  the  faithful,  by  which  the  first 
representatives  of  the  prophet  had  been  elevated  to  power ; 
and  this  regulation,  necessary  as  it  plainly  was  to  avert  in 
some  degree  the  dangers  of  schism  and  civil  war,  exposed 
the  kingdom  to  the  certainty  of  being  often  governed  by  feeble 
tyrants.  But  no  regulation  could  be  more  than  a  temporary 
preservative  against  civil  war.  The  dissensions  which  still 
separate  and  render  hostile  the  followers  of  Mohammed  may 
be  traced  to  the  first  events  that  ensued  upon  his  death,  to 
the  rejection  of  his  son-in-law  Ali  by  the  electors  of  Medina. 
Two  reigns,  those  of  Abubeker  and  Omar,  passed  in  external 
glory  and  domestic  reverence  ;  but  the  old  age  of  Othman 
was  weak  and  imprudent,  and  the  conspirators  against  him 
established  the  first  among  a  hundred  precedents  of  rebellion 
and  regicide.  Ali  was  now  chosen ;  but  a  strong  faction  dis- 
puted his  right ;  and  the  Saracen  empire  was,  for  many  years, 
distracted  with  civil  war,  among  competitors  who  appealed, 
in  reality,  to  no  other  decision  than  that  of  the  swrord.  The 
family  of  Ommiyah  succeeded  at  last  in  establishing  an  unre- 
sisted, if  not  an  undoubted  title.  But  rebellions  were  perpet- 
ually afterwards  breaking  out  in  that  vast  extent  of  dominion, 

_  till  one  of  these  revolters  acquired  by  success  a 

better  name  than  rebel,  and  founded  the  dynasty 
of  the  Abbassides. 

Damascus  had  been  the  seat  of  empire  under  the  Onimi- 


LtRekks,  etc.  KHALIFS   OF   BAGDAD.  597 

ades ;  it  was  removed  by  the  succeeding  family  to  Khaiifs  of 
their  new  city  of  Bagdad.  There  are  not  any  Bagdad. 
names  in  the  long  line  of  khaiifs,  after  the  companions  of 
Mohammed,  more  renowned  in  history  than  some  of  the 
earlier  sovereigns  who  reigned  in  this  capital  —  Almansor, 
Haroun  Alraschid,  and  Almamun.  Their  splendid  palaces, 
their  numerous  guards,  their  treasures  of  gold  and  silver,  the 
populousness  and  wealth  of  their  cities,  formed  a  striking 
contrast  to  the  rudeness  and  poverty  of  the  western  nations 
in  the  same  age.  In  their  court  learning,  which  the  first 
Moslem  had  despised  as  unwarlike  or  rejected  as  profane, 
was  held  in  honor.1  The  khalif  Almamun  especially  was 
distinguished  for  his  patronage  of  letters  ;  the  philosophical 
writings  of  Greece  were  eagerly  sought  and  translated ;  the 
stars  were  numbered,  the  course  of  the  planets  was  measured. 
The  Arabians  improved  upon  the  science  they  borrowed,  and 
returned  it  with  abundant  interest  to  Europe  in  the  commu- 
nication of  numeral  figures  and  the  intellectual  language  of 
algebra.2  Yet  the  merit  of  the  Abbassides  has  been  exagger- 
ated by  adulation  or  gratitude.  After  all  the  vague  praises 
of  hireling  poets,  which  have  sometimes  been  repeated  in 
Europe,  it  is  very  rare  to  read  the  history  of  an  eastern  sov- 
ereign unstained  by  atrocious  crimes.  No  Christian  govern- 
ment, except  perhaps  that  of  Constantinople,  exhibits  such  a 
series  of  tyrants  as  the  khalifs  of  Bagdad ;  if  deeds  of  blood, 
wrought  through  unbridled  passion  or  jealous  policy,  may 
challenge  the  name  of  tyranny.  These  are  ill  redeemed  by 
ceremonious  devotion  and  acts  of  trifling,  perhaps  ostentatious, 
humility,  or  even  by  the  best  attribute  of  Mohammedan 
princes  —  a  rigorous  justice  in  chastising  the  offences  of 
others.  Anecdotes  of  this  description  give  as  imperfect  a 
sketch  of  an  oriental  sovereign  as  monkish  chroniclers  some- 
times draw  of  one  in  Europe  who  founded  monasteries  and 


i  The  Arabian  writers  date  the  origin  Philological  Arrangement  is  perhaps  a 

of  their  literature  (except  those  works  of  book  better  known  ;  and  though  it  has 

Action  which  had  always  been  popular)  since  been  much  excelled,  was  one  of  the 

from   the  reign  of   Almansor,  a.d.   758.  first  contributions  in  our  own  language 

Abulpharagius,  p.  160  ;  Gibbon,  c.  52.  to  this  department,  in  which  a  great  deal 

2  Several  very  recent  publications  con-  yet  remaius  for  the  oriental  scholars  of 

tain  interesting  details  on  Saracen  litera-  Europe.     Casiri's  admirable  catalogue  of 

ture;    Berington's   Literary   History  of  Arabic  MSS.  in  the  Escurial  ought  before 

the  Middle  Ages,  Mill's  History  of  Mo-  this  to  have  been  followed  up  by  a  mora 

hammedanism,  chap    vi.,  Turner's  His-  accurate  examination  of  their  content! 

orv     cf     England,     vol.    i.       Harris's  than  it  was  possible  for  him  to  give 


598  SEPARATION    01    SPAIN  AND  AFRICA.        Chap.  VI 

obeyed  the  clergy  ;  though  it  must  be  owned  that  the  formei 
are  in  much  better  taste. 

Though  the  Abbassides  have  acquired  more  celebrity,  they 
never  attained  the  real  strength  of  their  predecessors.  Under 
the  last  of  the  house  of  Ommiyah,  one  command  was  obeyed 
almost  along  the  whole  diameter  of  the  known  world,  from 
the  banks  of  the  Sihon  to  the  utmost  promontory  of  Portugal. 
But  the  revolution  which  changed  the  succession  of  khalifa 
produced  another  not  less  important.  A  fugitive  of  the  van- 
quished family,  by  name  Abdalrahman,  arrived  in  Spain 
and  the  Moslem  of  that  country,  uot  sharing  in  the  prejudices 
Separation  which  had  stirred  up  the  Persians  in  favor  of  the 
of  Spain  line  of  Abbas,  and  conscious  that  their  remote  sit- 
uation entitled  them  to  independence,  proclaimed 
him  khalif  of  Cordova.  There  could  be  little  hope  of  re- 
ducing so  distant  a  dependency ;  and  the  example  was  not 
unlikely  to  be  imitated.  In  the  reign  of  Haroun  Alraschid 
two  principalities  were  formed  in  Africa  —  of  the  Aglabites, 
who  reigned  over  Tunis  and  Tripoli ;  and  of  the  Edri sites  in 
the  western  parts  of  Barbary.  These  yielded  in  about  a 
century  to  the  Fatimites,  a  more  powerful  dynasty,  who  after- 
wards established  an  empire  in  Egypt.1 

The  loss,  however,  of  Spain  and  Africa  was  the  inevitable 
effect  of  that  immensely  extended  dominion,  which  their  sepa- 
ration alone  would  not  have  enfeebled.  But  other  revolutions 
Decline  of  awaited  it  at  home:  In  the  history  of  the  Abas- 
the  khaiifs.  si^ea  0f  Bagdad  we  read  over  again  the  decline  of 
European  monarchies,  through  their  various  symptoms  of 
ruin;  and  find  successive  analogies  to  the  insults  of  the  bar- 
barian- towards  imperial  Rome  in  the  fifth  century,  to  the  per- 
sonal insignificance  of  the  Merovingian  kings,  and  to  the  feu- 
dal usurpations  that  dismembered  the  inheritance  of  Charle- 
magne. 1.  Beyond  the  northeastern  frontier  of  the  Sar- 
acen empire  dwelt  a  warlike  and  powerful  nation  of  the 
Tartar  family,  who  defended  the  independence  of  Turkestan 
from  the  sea  of  Aral  to  the  great  central  chain  of  mountains. 
In  the  wars  which  the  khaiifs  or  their  lieutenants  waged 
against  them  many  of  these  Turks  were  led  into  captivity,  and 
dispersed  over  the  empire.     Their  strength  and  courage  dis- 

1  For  these  revolutions,  which  it  is  not    Cardonne,  who  has  made  as   much   of 
v»ry  easy  to  fix  in  the  memory,  consult    them  as  the  subject  would  bear. 


Greeks,  etc.  DECLINE   OF   THE   KUALIFS  599 

'anguished  them  among  a  people  grown  effeminate  by  lux 
ury ;  and  that  jealousy  of  disaffection  among  his  subjects  se 
natural  to  an  eastern  monarch  might  be  an  additional  motive 
with  the  khalif  Motassem  to  form  bodies  of  guards  out  of 
these  prisoners.  But  his  policy  was  fatally  erroneous.  More 
rude  and  even  more  ferocious  than  the  Arabs,  they  contemned 
the  feebleness  of  the  khalifate,  while  they  grasped  at  its 
riches.  The  son  of  Motassem,  Motavvakkel,  was  murdered  in 
his  palace  by  the  barbarians  of  the  north  ;  and  his  fate  re- 
vealed the  secret  of  the  empire,  that  the  choice  of  its  sover- 
eign had  passed  to  their  slaves.  Degradation  and  death  were 
frequently  the  lot  of  succeeding  khalifs ;  but  in  the  East  the 
son  leaps  boldly  on  the  throne  which  the  blood  of  his  father 
has  stained,  and  the  praetorian  guards  of  Bagdad  rarely  failed 
to  render  a  fallacious  obedience  to  the  nearest  heir  of  the 
house  of  Abbas.  2.  In  about  one  hundred  years  after  the 
introduction  of  the  Turkish  soldiers  the  sovereigns  of  Bagdad 
sunk  almost  into  oblivion.  Al  Radi,  who  died  in  940,  \va? 
the  last  of  these  that  officiated  in  the  mosque,  that  command- 
ed the  forces  in  person,  that  addressed  the  people  from  the 
pulpit,  that  enjoyed  the  pomp  and  splendor  of  royalty.1  But 
he  was  the  first  who  appointed,  instead  of  a  vizir,  a  new  offi- 
cer —  a  mayor,  as  it  were,  of  the  palace  —  with  the  title  of 
Emir  al  Omra,  commander  of  commanders,  to  whom  he  dele- 
gated by  compulsion  the  functions  of  his  office.  This  title 
was  usually  seized  by  active  and  martial  spirits  ;  it  was  some- 
times hereditary,  and  in  effect  irrevocable  by  the  khalifs, 
whose  names  hardly  appear  after  this  time  in  Oriental  annals. 
3.  During  these  revolutions  of  the  palace  every  province 
successively  shook  off  its  allegiance ;  new  principalities  were 
formed  in  Syria  and  Mesopotamia,  as  well  as  in  Khorasan 
and  Persia,  till  the  dominion  of  the  Commander  of  the  Faith- 
ful was  literally  confined  to  the  city  of  Bagdad  and  its  adja- 
cent territory.  For  a  time  some  of  these  princes,  who  had 
been  appointed  as  governors  by  the  khalifs,  professed  to  re- 
spect his  supremacy  by  naming  him  in  the  public  prayers  and 
upon  the  coin  ;  but  these  tokens  of  dependence  were  gradually 
obliterated.2 

i  Abulfeda,    p    261;    Gibbon,   c.   52;  discussed  in  the  52nd  chapter  of  Gibbon, 

Modern  Unir.  Hist.    vol.   ii.     Al  Kadi's  which  is,   in    itself,   a  complete   philo 

command  of  the  army  is  only  mentioned  sophical  dissertation  upon  this  part  o/ 

by  the  last.  history 

2  The  decline  of  the  Saracens  is  fully 


000  REVIVAL  OF  Chap,  V) 

Such  is  the  outline  of  Saracenic  history  for  three  centuries 
.      after  Mohammed ;  one  age  of  glorious  conquest ;  a 
the  Greek       second  of  stationary  but  rather  precarious  great- 
empire.  Qegg  .  ;(  ^^  Qf  ni^\(\  decline.     The  Greek  empire 

meanwhile  survived,  and  almost  recovered  from  the  shock  it 
had  sustained.  Besides  the  decline  of  its  enemies,  several 
circumstances  may  be  enumerated  tending  to  its  preservation. 
The  maritime  province  of  Cilicia  had  been  overrun  by  the 
Mohammedans  ;  but  between  this  and  the  Lesser  Asia  Mount 
Taurus  raises  its  massy  buckler,  spreading  as  a  natural  bul- 
wark from  the  sea-coast  of  the  ancient  Pamphylia  to  the  hilly 
district  of  Isauria,  whence  it  extends  in  an  easterly  direction, 
separating  the  Cappadocian  and  Cilician  plains,  and,  after 
throwing  off  considerable  ridges  to  the  north  and  south,  con- 
nects itself  with  other  chains  of  mountains  that  penetrate  far 
into  the  Asiatic  continent.  Beyond  this  barrier  the  Saracens 
formed  no  durable  settlement,  though  the  armies  of  Alraschid 
wasted  the  country  as  far  as  the  Hellespont,  and  the  city  of 
Amorium,  in  Phrygia,  was  razed  to  the  ground  by  Al  Motas- 
sem.  The  position  of  Constantinople,  chosen  with  a  sagacity 
to  which  the  course  of  events  almost  gave  the  appearance  of 
prescience,  secured  her  from  any  immediate  danger  on  the 
side  of  Asia,  and  rendered  her  as  little  accessible  to  an  enemy 
as  any  city  which  valor  and  patriotism  did  not  protect.  Yel 
a d  668  "  m  ,ne  c^a3s  °f  AraD'an  energy  she  was  twice  at- 
tacked by  great  naval  armaments.  The  first  siege, 
or  rather  blockade,  continued  for  seven  years ;  the 
second,  though  shorter,  was  more  terrible,  and  her  walls,  as 
well  as  her  port,  were  actually  invested  by  the  combined 
forces  of  the  khalif  Waled,  under  his  brother  Moslema.1  The 
final  discomfiture  of  these  assailants  showed  the  resisting  force 
of  the  empire,  or  rather  of  its  capital ;  but  perhaps  the  aban- 
donment of  such  maritime  enterprises  by  the  Saracens  may 
be  in  some  measure  ascribed  to  the  removal  of  their  metrop- 
olis from  Damascus  to  Bagdad.  But  the  Greeks  in  their 
turn  determined  to  dispute  the  command  of  the  sea.  By  pos- 
sessing the  secret  of  an  inextinguishable  fiie,  they  fought  on 
superior  terms  ;  their  wealth,  perhaps  their  skill,  enabled  them 
to  employ  larger  and  better  appointed  vessels  ;  and  they  ulti- 
mately expelled  their  enemies  from  the  islands  of  Crete  and 

i  Gibbon,  c.  52 


Greeks,  etc.  TITE  GREEK  E^rPTRE  G01 

Cyprus.  By  land  they  were  less  desirous  of  encountering  the 
Moslem.  The  science  of  tactics  is  studied  by  the  pusillani- 
mous, like  that  of  medicine  by  the  sick ;  and  the  Byzantine 
emperors,  Leo  and  Constantine,  have  left  written  treatises  on 
the  art  of  avoiding  defeat,  of  protracting  contest,  of  resisting 
attack.1  But  this  timid  policy,  and  even  the  purchase  of  ar 
mistices  from  the  Saracens,  were  not  ill  calculated  for  the 
state  of  both  nations.  "While  Constantinople  temporized, 
Bagdad  shook  to  her  foundations  ;  and  the  heirs  of  the  Roman 
name  might  boast  the  immortality  of  their  own  empire  when 
they  contemplated  the  dissolution  of  that  which  had  so  rapidly 
sprung  up  and  perished.  Amidst  all  the  crimes  and  revolu- 
tions of  the  Byzantine  government  —  and  its  history  is  but  a 
series  of  crimes  and  revolutions  —  it  was  never  dismembered 
by  intestine  war.  A  sedition  in  the  army,  a  tumult  in  the 
theatre,. a  conspiracy  in  the  palace,  precipitated  a  monarch 
from  the  throne  ;  but  the  allegiance  of  Constantinople  was 
instantly  transferred  to  his  successor,  and  the  provinces  im- 
plicitly obeyed  the  voice  of  the  capital.  The  custom  too  of 
partition,  so  baneful  to  the  Latin  kingdoms,  and  which  was  not 
altogethor  unknown  to  the  Saracens,  never  prevailed  in  the 
Greek  empire.  It  stood  in  the  middle  of  the  tenth  century, 
as  vicious  indeed  and  cowardly,  but  more  wealthy,  more  en- 
lightened, and  far  more  secure  from  its  enemies  than  under 
the  first  successors  of  Heraclius.  For  about  one  hundred 
years  preceding  there  had  been  only  partial  wars  with  the 
Mohammedan  potentates  ;  and  in  these  the  emperors  seem 
gradually  to  have  gained  the  advantage,  and  to  have  become 
more  frequently  the  aggressors.  But  the  increasing  distrac- 
tions of  the  East  encouraged  two  brave  usurpers,  A.D. 
Nicephorus  Phocas  and  John  Zimisces,  to  attempt  963_975- 
the  actual  recovery  of  the  lost  provinces.  They  carried 
the  Roman  arms  (one  may  use  the  term  with  less  reluctance 
than  usual)  over  Syria  ;  Antioch  and  Aleppo  were  taken  by 
storm  ;  Damascus  submitted  ;  even  the  cities  of  Mesopotamia, 
beyond  the  ancient  boundary  of  the  Euphrates,  were  added 
to  the  trophies  of  Zimisces,  who  unwillingly  spared  the  cap- 
ital of  the  khalifate.  From  such  distant  conquests  it  was 
expedient,  and  indeed   necessary,  to  withdraw  ;  but    Cilicia 

1  Gibbon,  c.  53.     Constantine  Porphy-  weakness  and   cowardice,    and    pleasing 

rogenitus,   in  his  advice    to   his  son   as  itself  in  petty  arts  to  elude  the  rap  icity 

to  the  administration  of  the  empire,  be-  or  divide  the  power  of  its  enemies 
*rays  a   mind   not   ashamed   to   confess 


G02  CONQUESTS   OF  THE  TURKS.  Chain  Vl 

and  Antioch  were  permanently  restored  to  the  empire.  Ai 
the  close  of  the  tenth  century  the  emperors  of  Constantinople 
possessed  the  best  and  greatest  portion  of  the  modern  king- 
dom of  Naples,  a  part  of  Sicily,  the  whole  European  domin- 
ions of  the  Ottomans,  the  province  of  Anatolia  or  Asia 
Minor,  with  some  part  of  Syria  and  Armenia.1 

These  successes  of  the  Greek  empire  were  certainly  much 
rather  due  to  the  weakness  of  its  enemies  than  to  any  revival 
of  national  eourage  and  vigor  ;  yet  they  would  probably  have 
been  more  durable  if  the  contest  had  been  only 
with  the  khalifate,  or  the  kingdoms  derived  from 
it.  But  a  new  actor  was  to  appear  on  the  stage  of  Asiatic 
tragedy.  The  same  Turkish  nation,  the  slaves  and  captives 
from  which  had  become  arbiters  of  the  sceptre  of  Bagdad, 
passed  their  original  limits  of  the  Taxartes  or  Sihon.  The 
sultans  of  Ghazna.  a  dynasty  whose  splendid  conquests  were 
of  very  short  duration,  had  deemed  it  politic  to  divide  the 
strength  of  these  formidable  allies  by  inviting  a  part  of  them 
into  Khorasan.  They  covered  that  fertile  province  with 
their  pastoral  tents,  and  beckoned  their  compatriots  to  share 
„,  .  the  riches  of  the   south.     The    Ghaznevides  fell 

conquests.  the  earliest  victims  ;  but  Persia,  violated  m  turn 
a.d.  1038.  ^  every  conqueror,  was  a  tempting  and  unresist- 
ing prey.  Togrol  Bek,  the  founder  of  the  Seljukian  dynasty 
of  Turks,  overthrew  the  family  of  Bowides,  who  had  long 
reigned  at  Ispahan,  respected  the,  pageant  of  Mohammedan 
sovereignty  in  the  khalif  of  Bagdad,  embraced  with  all  his 
tribes  the  religion  of  the  vanquished,  and  commenced  the  at- 
tack upon  Christendom  by  an  irruption  into  Armenia.  His 
nephew  and  successor  Alp  Arslan  defeated  and  took  prisoner 
the  emperor  Romanus  Diogenes  ;  and  the  conquest 

A.D.  1071.  x>    A     •       HT-  1  .  1 \    J   i.  • 

of  Asia  Minor  was  almost  completed  by  princes  ol 
the  same  family,  the  Seljukians  of  Rum,2  who  were  permitted 
by  Malek  Shah,  the  third  sultan  of  the  Turks,  to  form  an  in- 
dependent kingdom.  Through  their  own  exertions,  and  the 
selfish  impolicy  of  rival  competitors  for  the  throne  of  Con- 
stantinople, who  bartered  the  strength  of  the  empire  for  as- 
sistance, the  Turks  became  masters  of  the  Asiatic  cities  and 

1  Gibbon,  c.  62  and  53.    Tbe  latter  of  cally,  according  to  the  order  of  time  bul 

these  chapters  contains  as  luminous  a  philosophically,  according  to  their  iela- 

sketch  of  the  condition  of  Greece  as  the  tions. 

former   does  of  Saracenic   history.      In  '-'  Rum,  i.  e.  country  of  the  Koinans 
each,  the  facts  are  not  grouped   histori- 


Grkeks,  ktc.         PROGRESS   OF  THE  GREEKS. 


603 


fortified  passes  ;  nor  did  there  seem  any  obstacle  to  the  inva- 
sion of  Europe.1 

In  this  state  of  jeopardy  the  Greek  empire  looked  for  aid 
to  the  nations  of  the  West,  and  received  it  in  fuller  The  first 
measure  than  was  expected,  or  perhaps  desired.  Crusade- 
The  deliverance  of  Constantinople  was  indeed  a  very  second- 
ary object  with  the  crusaders.  But  it  was  necessarily  in- 
cluded in  their  scheme  of  operations,  which,  though  they  all 
tended  to  the  recovery  of  Jerusalem,  must  commence  with 
the  first  enemies  that  lay  on  their  line  of  march.  The  Turks 
were  entirely  defeated,  their  capital  of  Nice  restored  to  the 
empire.  As  the  Franks  passed  onwards,  the  emperor 
Alexius  Comnenus  trod  on  their  footsteps,  and  secured  to 
himself  the  fruits  for  which  their  enthusiasm  disdained  to 
wait.  He  regained  possession  of  the  strong  places  on  the 
iEgean  shores,  of  the  defiles  of  Bithynia,  and  of  the  entire 
coast  of  Asia  Minor,  both  on  the  Euxine  and  Mediterranean 
seas,  which  the  Turkish  armies,  composed  of  cavalry  and 
unused  to  regular  warfare,  could  not  recover.2  So  much 
must  undoubtedly  be  ascribed  to  the  first  crusade.  But  I 
think  that  the  general  effect  of  these  expeditions  has  been 
overrated  by  those  who  consider  them  as  having  permanently 
retarded  the  progress  of  the  Turkish  power.  The  Progress  of 
Christians  in  Palestine  and  Syria  were  hardly  in  the  Greeks- 
contact  with  the  Seljukian  kingdom  of  Rum,  the  only  ene- 
mies of  the  empire ;  and  it  is  not  easy  to  perceive  that  their 
small  and  feeble  principalities,  engaged  commonly  in  defend- 
ing themselves  against  the  Mohammedan  princes  of  Meso- 
potamia, or  the  Fatimite  khalifs  of  Egypt,  could  obstruct  the 
arms  of  a  sovereign  of  Jconium  upon  the  Mreander  or  the 
Halys.  Other  causes  are  adequate  to  explain  the  equipoise 
in  which  the  balance  of  dominion  in  Anatolia  was  kept 
during  the  twelfth  century :  the  valor  and  activity  of  the  two 
Comneni,  John  and  Manuel,  especially  the  former ;  and  the 
frequent  partitions  and  internal  feuds,  through  which  the 
Seljukians  of  Iconium,  like  all  other  Oriental  governments, 
became  incapable  of  foreign  aggression. 

But  whatever  obligation  might  be  due  to  the  first  crusaders 
from  the  Eastern    empire   was  cancelled  by  their  descend- 

i  Gibbon,  c.  57  ;  De  Guignes,  Hist,  des  was  reannexed  to  the  empire  during  the 

Huns>  t.  ii.  1.  2.  reign  of  Alexius,  or  of  his  gallant  son 

2  It    does   not    seem   perfectly     clear  John   Comnenus.      But    the    doubt    it 

whether  the  sea-coast,  north  and  south,  hardly  worth  noticing. 


(504  CAPTURE  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE.  Chap.  VL 

ants  one  hundred  years  afterwards,  when  the  fourth  in  num- 
Captureof  ber  of  those  expeditions  was  turned  to  the  sub- 
u^'bf"  jugation  of*  Constantinople  itself.  One  of  those 
the  Latins.  domestic  revolutions  which  occur  perpetually  in 
Byzantine  history  had  placed  an  usurper  on  the  imperial 
throne.  The  lawful  monarch  was  condemned  to  blindness 
and  a  prison  ;  but  the  heir  escaped  to  recount  his  misfortunes 
to  the  fleet  and  army  of  crusaders  assembled  in 
the  Dalmatian  port  of  Zara.  This  armament  had 
been  collected  for  the  usual  purposes,  and  through  the  usual 
motives,  temporal  and  spiritual,  of  a  crusade  ;  the  military 
force  chiefly  consisted  of  French  nobles  ;  the  naval  was  sup- 
plied by  the  republic  of  Venice,  whose  doge  commanded 
personally  in  the  expedition.  It  was  not  apparently  consis- 
tent with  the  primary  object  of  retrieving  the  Christian 
affairs  in  Palestine  to  interfere  in  the  government  of  a 
Christian  empire ;  but  the  temptation  of  punishing  a  faithless 
people,  and  the  hope  of  assistance  in  their  subsequent 
operations,  prevailed.  They  turned  their  prows  up  the 
Archipelago ;  and,  notwithstanding  the  vast  population  and 
defensible  strength  of  Constantinople,  compelled  the  usurper 
to  fly,  and  the  citizens  to  surrender.  But  animosities  spring- 
ing from  religious  schism  and  national  jealousy  were  not 
likely  to  be  allayed  by  such  remedies ;  the  Greeks,  wounded 
in  their  pride  and  bigotry,  regarded  the  legitimate  emperor 
as  a  creature  of  their  enemies,  ready  to  sacrifice  their  church, 
a  stipulated  condition  of  his  restoration,  to  that  of  Rome.  In 
a  few  months  a  new  sedition  and  conspiracy  raised  another 
usurper  in  defiance  of  the  crusaders'  army  encamped  without 
the  walls.     The  siege  instantly  recommenced  ;  and 

a  d   1204  »   ^ 

after  three  months  the  city  of  Constantinople  was 
taken  by  storm.  The  tale  of  pillage  and  murder  is  always 
uniform  ;  but  the  calamities  of  ancient  capitals,  like  those 
of  the  great,  impress  us  more  forcibly.  Even  now  we  sym- 
pathize with  the  virgin  majesty  of  Constantinople,  decked 
with  the  accumulated  wealth  of  ages,  and  resplendent  vvith 
the  monuments  of  Roman  empire  and  of  Grecian  art.  Her 
populousness  is  estimated  beyond  credibility :  ten,  twenty, 
thirty-fold  that  of  London  or  Paris ;  certainly  far  beyond  the 
united  capitals  of  all  European  kingdoms  in  that  age.1     In 

1  Ville  HurJouin   reckons  the  inhabit-    mil  nommes  ou  plus,  by  which  Gibbou 
ants  of  Constantinople  at  quatre  cens     understands  him  to  mean  men  of  ft  mili 


Greeks,  etc.         PARTITION   OF   THE   EMPIRE.  605 

magnificence  she  excelled  them  more  than  in  numbers ; 
instead  of  the  thatched  roofs,  the  mud  walls,  the  narrow 
streets,  the  pitiful  buildings  of  those  cities,  she  had  marble 
and  gilded  palaces,  churches  and  monasteries,  the  works  of 
skilful  architects,  through  nine  centuries,  gradually  sliding 
from  the  severity  of  ancient  taste  into  the  more  various  and 
brilliant  combinations  of  eastern  fancy.1  In  the  libraries 
of  Constantinople  were  collected  the  remains  of  Grecian 
learning;  her  forum  and  hippodrome  were  decorated  with 
those  of  Grecian  sculpture  ;  but  neither  would  be  spared  by 
undistinguishing  rapine  ;  nor  were  the  chiefs  of  the  crusaders 
more  able  to  appreciate  the  loss  than  their  soldiery.  Four 
horses,  that  breathe  in  the  brass  of  Lysippus,  were  removed 
from  Constantinople  to  the  square  of  St.  Mark  at  Venice ; 
destined  again  to  become  the  trophies  of  war,  and  to  follow 
the  alternate  revolutions  of  conquest.  But  we  learn  from  a 
contemporary  Greek  to  deplore  the  fate  of  many  other  pieces 
of  sculpture,  which  were  destroyed  in  wantonness,  or  even 
coined  into  brass  money.2 

The  lawful  emperor  and  his  son  had  perished  in  the 
rebellion  that  gave  occasion  to  this  catastrophe;  partition  of 
and  there  remained  no  risrlit  to  interfere  with  that  the  emPire- 
of  conquest.  But  the  Latins  were  a  promiscuous  multitude, 
and  what  their  independent  valor  had  earned  was  not  to  be 
transferred  to  a  single  master.  Though  the  name  of  emperor 
seemed  necessary  for  the  government  of  Constantinople,  the 
unity  of  despotic  power  was  very  foreign  to  the  principles 
and  the  interests  of  the  crusaders.  In  their  selfish  schemes 
of  aggrandizement  they  tore  in  pieces  the  Greek  empire. 
One  fourth  only  was  allotted  to  the  emperor,  three  eighths 
were  the  share  of  the  republic  of  Venice,  and  the  remainder 
was  divided  among  the  chiefs.  Baldwin  count  of  Flanders 
obtained  the  imperial  title,  with  the  feudal  sovereignty  over 
the  minor  principalities.     A  monarchy  thus  dismembered  had 

tary  age.  Le  Rsau  allows  a  million  for  latia  sunt  in  eft,  opere  mero  fabrefacta ! 
the  whole  population.  Gibbon,  vol.  xi.  quo  etiam  in  plateis  vel  in  vicis  opera 
p.  213.  We  should  probably  rate  Lon-  ad  spectanduui  mirabilia!  Taedium  est 
don,  in  1204,  Wo  high  at  60,000  souls,  quideni  magnum  recitare,  quanta  sit  ibi 
Paris  had  been  enlarged  by  Philip  Au-  opulentia  bonorum  omnium,  auri  et 
gustus,  and  stood  on  more  ground  than  argenti  palliorum  multifonnium,  sacra- 
London.  Delamare  sur  la  Police,  t.  i.  p.  rumque  reliquiaruni  Omni  etiam  tem- 
76.  pore,  navigio  frequent]  cuncta  hominum 
1  0  quanta  civitas,  exclaims  Fulk  of  necessaria  illuc  afferuntnr.  Du  Chesne 
Ghartres  a  hundred  years  before,  nobiiks  Scrip.  Iterum  Gallicaruui,  t.  iv.  p.  822 
et  decora!  quot  monasteria  quotque  oa-  -  Oibbon.  c.  60 


(J06  INVASIONS   OF   ASIA..  Chap.  VI. 

little  prospect  of  honor  or  durability.  The  Latin  emperors 
of  Constantinople  were  more  contemptible  and  unfortunate, 
not  so  much  from  personal  character  as  political  weakness, 
than  their  predecessors  ;  their  vassals  rebelled  against  sover- 
eigns not  more  powerful  than  themselves ;  the  Bulgarians,  a 
nation  who,  after  being  long  formidable,  had  been  subdued  by 
the  imperial  arms,  and  only  recovered  independence  on  thi- 
eve of  the  Latin  conquest,  insulted  their  capital;  the  Greeks 
The  Greeks  viewed  them  with  silent  hatred,  and  bailed  the 
recover  Con-  dawning  deliverance  from  (be  Asiatic  coast.  On 
stanmope  t^  g.^e  0f  the  Bosphorus  the  Latin  usurpation 
was  scarcely  for  a  moment  acknowledged;  Nice  became  the 
seat  of  a  Greek  dynasty,  who  reigned  with  honor  as  far  as 
the  Mseander  ;  and  crossing  into  Europe,  after  having  estab- 
,_„        lished    their    dominion    throughout    Romania   and 

A. D.  1261.  .  .  11      -l       i  1        ,.     T        • 

other  provinces,  expelled  the  last  Latin  emperors 
from  Constantinople  in  less  than  sixty  years  from  its  capture. 

During  the  reign  of  these  Greeks  at  Nice  they  had  for- 
tunately little  to  dread  on  the  side  of  their  former  enemies, 
and  were  generally  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the  Selju- 
kians  of  Iconium.  That  monarchy  indeed  had  sufficient  ob- 
jects of  apprehension  for  itself.  Their  own  example  in 
,  changing  the  upland  plains  of  Tartarv  for  the  cul- 
Asia  by  the  tivated  valleys  of  the  south  was  imitated  in  the 
Karismiaus,  thirteenth  century  by  two  successive  hordes  of 
northern  barbarian-.  The  Karismians,  whose  tents  had 
been  pitched  on  the  lower  Oxus  and  Caspian  Sea,  availed 
themselves  of  the  decline  of  the  Turkish  power  to  establish 
their  dominion  in  Persia,  and  menaced,  though  they  did  not 
overthrow,  the  kingdom  of  Iconium.  A  more  tremendous 
storm  ensued  in  the  eruption  of  Moguls  under  the 
sons  of  Zingis  Khan.  From  the  farthest  regions 
of  Chinese  Tartary  issued  a  race  more  fierce  and  destitute  of 
civilization  than  those  who  had  preceded,  whose  numbers  were 
told  by  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  whose,  only  test  of  victory 
was  devastation.  All  Asia,  from  the  sea  of  China  to  the 
a.d  1218.  Euxine.  wasted  beneath  the  locusts  of  the  north. 
i.i>.  12(2.  They  annihilated  the  phantom  of  authority  which 
still  lingered  with  the  name  of  khalif  at  Bagdad.  They  re- 
duced into  dependence  and  finally  subverted  the  Seljukian 
dynasties  of  Persia,  Syria,  and  Iconium.  Tbe  Turks  of  the 
latter  kingdom  betook  themselves  to  tbe  mountainous  country, 


Greeks,  etc.  THE  OTTOMAN'S.  c,0~ 

where  they  formed  several  petty  principalities,  which  sub- 
sisted  by  incursions  into   the  territory  of  the  Moguls  or  th*3 
Greeks.     The  chief  of  one  of  these,  named  Oth- 
man,  at  the  end  of   the  thirteenth  century,  pene- 
trated into    the    province  of  Bithynia,  from  which  his  pos 
terity  were  never  withdrawn.1 

The  empire   of  Constantinople   had   never   recovered  thf 
blow  it  received  at  the  handsof  the  Latins.     Most 
of  the  islands  in  the  Archipelago,  and  the  provinces  state  off^ie 
of   proper  Greece  from  Thessaly  southward,  were  Gree.k 
still  possessed  by  those  invaders.     The  wealth  and  e' 
naval  power  of  the  empire  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  the 
maritime  republics  ;  Venice,  Genoa,  Pisa,  and  Barcelona  were 
enriched  by  a  commerce  which  they  carried  on  as  independent 
states  within  the  precincts  of  Constantinople,  scarcely  deign- 
ing to  solicit  the  permission  or  recognize  the  supremacy  of 
its  master.     In   a  great   battle   fought  under  the 
walls  of  the  city  between  the  Venetian  and  Geno- 
ese fleets,  the  weight  of    the   Roman  empire,   in    Gibbon's 
expression,  was  scarcely  felt  in  the  balance  of  these  opulent 
and  powerful  republics.     Eight  galleys  were  the  contribution 
of  the  emperor  Cantacuzene  to  his  Venetian  allies ;  and  upon 
their  defeat  lie  submitted  to  the  ignominy  of  excluding  them 
forever  from   trading   in  his  dominions.     Meantime  the  re- 
mains of  the  empire  in  Asia  were  seized  by  the  independent 
Turkish   dynasties,  of  which   the  most  illustrious, 
that  of   the  Ottomans,   occupied  the   province  of  ottomans. 
Bithynia.      Invited    by  a   Byzantine  faction    into  A'D<  143L 
Europe,  about   the  middle  of  the   fourteenth  century,  they 
fixed  themselves  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  capital,  and  in 
the  thirty  years'  reign  of  Amurath  I.  subdued,  with  little  re- 
sistance, the  province  of  Romania  and   the   small  Christian 
kingdoms  that  had  been  formed  on  the  lower  Danube.     Ba- 
jazet,  the   successor  of   Amurath,  reduced   the  independent 
emirs  of  Anatolia  to  subjection,  and,  after  long  threatening 
Constantinople,  invested   it   by  sea  and   land.     The   Greeks 
called  loudly  upon  their  brethren  of  the  West  for 
aid  against  the  common  enemy  of  Christendom ; 
but  the  flower  of  French  chivalry  had  been  slain  or  taken  in 
the  battle  of  JSicopolis  in  Bulgaria,2  where  the  king  of  Hun- 

i  De  Guignes,  Hist,  des  Huns,  t.  iii.  1.        2  The  Hungarians  lied   in  this  battle 
15;  Gibbon,  c.  64  and  deserted    their   allies,    according   ta 


008  THE  TARTARS   OR  MOGULS.  Chap.  VI. 

gary,  notwithstanding  the  heroism  of  these  volunteers,  was 
entirely  defeated  by  Bajazet.  The  emperor  Manuel  left  his 
capital  with  a  faint  hope  of  exciting  the  courts  of  Europe  to 
some  decided  efforts  by  personal  representations  of  the  danger; 
and,  during  his  absence,  Constantinople  was  saved,  not  by  a 
friend,  indeed,  but  by  a  power  more  formidable  to  her  ene- 
mies than  to  herself. 

The  loose  masses  of  mankind,  that,  without  laws,  agrieul 
The  Tirtars  <ure'  or  fixca<  dwellings,  overspread  the  vast  centra 
or  Moguls  regions  of  Asia,  have,  at  various  times,  been  im- 
pelled by  necessity  of  subsistence,  or  through  the 
casual  appearance  of  a  commanding  genius,  upon  the  domain 
of  culture  and  civilization.  Two  principal  roads  connect  the 
nations  of  Tartary  with  those  of  the  west  and  south  ;  the  one 
into  Europe  along  the  sea  of  Azoph  and  northern  coast  of 
the  Euxine;  the  other  across  the  interval  between  the  Buk- 
harian  mountains  and  the  Caspian  into  Persia.  Four  times 
at  least  within  the  period  of  authentic  history  the  Scythian 
tribes  have  taken  the  former  course  and  poured  themselves 
into  Europe,  but  each  wave  was  less  effectual  than  the  pre- 
ceding. The  first  of  these  was  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  cen- 
turies, for  we  may  range  those  rapidly  successive  migrations 
of  the  Goths  and  Huns  together,  when  the  Roman  empire 
fell  to  the  ground,  and  the  only  boundary  of  barbarian  con- 
quest was  the  Atlantic  ocean  upon  the  shores  of  Portugal. 
The  second  wave  came  on  with  the  Hungarians  in  the  tenth 
century,  whose  ravages  extended  as  far  a-=  the  southern  prov- 
inces of  France.  A  third  attack  was  sustained  from  the 
Moguls  under  the  children  of  Zingis  at  the  same  period  as 
that  which  overwhelmed  Persia.  The  Russian  monarchy 
was  destroyed  in  this  invasion,  and  for  two  hundred  years 
that  great  country  lay  prostrate  under  the  yoke  of  the  Tartars. 
As  they  advanced,  Poland  and  Hungary  gave  little  opposi 
tion;  and  the  farthest  nations  of  Europe  wen1  appalled  by 
the  tempest.  But  Germany  was  no  longer  as  she  had  been 
in   the  anarchy  of  the  tenth   century;  the  Moguls  were  un- 

the   Memoires  de  Bou'ieaut,  c.  25.     But  very  high  price.     Many  of  eminent  birth 

Froissart,  who  seems  a  fairer  authority,  and   merit   were   put   to   death;    a   fate 

mputes  the  defeat  to  the  rashness  of  the  from  which  Boucicaut  was  saved  by  the 

French.     Part  iv.  ch.  79.     The  count  de  interference  of  the  count  de  Nevers,  who 

Nevers  (Jean  Sans  Peur,  afterwards  duke  might  better  himself  have  perished  with 

of    Burgundy),     who    commanded     the  honor  on  that  occasion  than  survived  to 

French,  was  made   prisoner  with  others  plunge  his  country  into  civil  war  and  his 

)f  the  roval   blood,  and  ransomed    at  a  name  into  infamy 


Greeks,  etc.  DEFEAT   OF   BAJAZET.  GOD 

used  to  resistance,  and  still  less  inclined  to  regular  warfare  ; 
they  retired  before  the  emperor  Frederic  II.,  and  the  utmost 
points  of  their  western  invasion  were  the  cities  of  m 
Lignitz  in  Silesia  and  Neustadt  in  Austria.  In 
the  fourth  and  last  aggression  of  the  Tartars  their  progress 
in  Europe  is  hardly  perceptible ;  the  Moguls  of  Timur's 
army  could  only  boast  the  destruction  of'  Azoph  and  the  pil- 
lage of  some  Russian  provinces.  Timur,  the  sovereign  of 
these  Moguls  and  founder  of  their  second  dynasty,  which  has 
been  more  permanent  and  celebrated  than  that  of  Zingis,  had 
been  the  prince  of  a  small  tribe  in  Transoxiana,  between  ths 
Gihon  and  Sirr,  the  doubtful  frontier  of  settled  and  pastoral 
nations.  His  own  energy  and  the  weakness  of  his  neighbors 
are  sufficient  to  explain  the  revolution  he  effected.  Like 
former  conquerors,  Togrol  Bek  and  Zingis,  he  chose  the  road 
through  Persia ;  and,  meeting  little  resistance  from  the  dis- 
ordered governments  of  Asia,  extended  his  empire  on  one 
side  to  the  Syrian  coast,  while  by  successes  still  more  re- 
nowned, though  not  belonging  to  this  place,  it  reached  on  the 
other  to  the  heart  of  Hindostan.  In  his  old  a«2;e  the  restless- 
ness  of  ambition  impelled  him  against  the  Turks  of  Anatolia. 
Bajazet  hastened  from  the  siege  of  Constantinople  to  a  more 
perilous  contest :  his  defeat  and  captivity  in  the  Defeat  of 
plains  of  Angora  clouded  for  a  time  the  Ottoman  Bajazet. 
crescent,  and  preserved  the  wreck  of  the  Greek  AD' 1402 
empire  for  fifty  years  longer. 

The  Moguls  did  not  improve  their  victory ;  in  the  western 
parts  of  Asia,  as  in    Hindostan,  Timur  was  but  a  Dangerof 
barbarian  destroyer,  though  at   Samarcand  a  sov-  Constant* 
ereign  and  a  legislator.     He  gave  up  Anatolia  to  nop  e 
the  sons  of  Bajazet ;  but  the  unity  of  their  power  was  broken  ; 
and  the  Ottoman  kingdom,  like  those   which  had  preceded, 
experienced   the   evils   of   partition   and    mutual    animosity. 
For  about  twenty   years  an  opportunity  was   given  to   the 
Greeks  of  recovering  part  of  their  losses  ;    but  they  were 
incapable   of   making  the  best  use  of   this  advantage,  and, 
though  they  regained  possession  of  part  of  Romania,  did  not 
extirpate  a  strong  Turkish  colony  that  held  the  city  of  Galli- 
poli  in  the  Chersonesus.   When  Amurath  II.,  there-        .  .„. 
tore,  reunited  under  his  vigorous  sceptre  the  Otto- 
man monarchy,  Constantinople  was  exposed  to  another  siege 
and  to  fresh  losses.    Her  walls,  however,  repelled  the  enemy; 

VOL.  i.  — m.  39 


CIO  FALL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE.      Chap.  "VI. 

and  during  tin-  reign  of  Amurafh  she  had  leisure  to  repeat 
those  signals  of  distress  which  the  princes  of  Christendom 
refused  to  observe.  The  situation  of  Europe  was,  indeed 
sufficiently  inauspicious;  France,  the  original  country  of  the 
crusades  and  of  chivalry,  was  involved  in  foreign  and  domestic 
war  ;  while  a  schism,  apparently  interminable,  rent  the  bosom 
of  the  Latin  church  and  impaired  the  efficiency  of  the  only 
power  that  could  unite  and  animate  it-  disciples  in  a  religious 
war.  Even  when  the  Roman  pontiffs  were  besl  disposed  to 
rescue  Constantinople  from  destruction,  it  was  rather  as 
masters  than  as  allies  that  they  would  interfere;  their  ungen- 
erous bigotry,  or  rather  pride,  dictated  the  submission  of  her 
church  and  the  renunciation  of  her  favorite  article  of  dis- 
tinctive faith.  The  Greeks  yielded  with  reluctance  and 
insincerity  in  the  council  of  Florence  ;  but  soon  rescinded 
their  treaty  of  uiron.  Ugenius  IV.  procured  a  short  diver- 
1444  s*on  on  ^ie  e  °^  Hungary ;  but  after  the  un- 
fortunate battle  of  Warna  the  Hungarians  were 
abundantly  employed  in  self-defence. 

The  two  monarchies  which  have  successively  held  their 
seat  in  the  city  of  Constantine  may  be  contrasted  in  the  cir- 
cumstances of  their  decline.  In  the  present  day  we  anticipate, 
with  an  assurance  that  none  can  deem  extravagant,  the  ap- 
proaching subversion  of  the  Ottoman  power  ;  but  the  signs 
of  internal  weakness  have  not  yet  been  confirmed  by  the  dis- 
memberment of  provinces ;  and  the  arch  of  dominion,  that 
long  since  has  seemed  nodding  to  its  fall  and  totters  at  every 
blast  of  the  north,  still  rests  upon  the  landmarks  of  ancient 
conquest,  and  spans  the  ample  regions  from  Bagdad  to  Del- 
grade.  Far  different  were  the  events  that  preceded  the  disso- 
lution of  the  Greek  empire.  Every  province  was  in  turn 
subdued  —  every  city  opened  her  gates  to  the  conqueror :  the 
limbs  were  lopped  off  one  by  one ;  but  the  pulse 
still  beat  at  the  heart,  and  the  majesty  of  the  Ro- 
man name  was  ultimately  confined  to  the  walls  of  Constanti- 
nople. Before  Mahomet  II.  planted  his  cannon  against  them, 
he  had  completed  every  smaller  conquest  and  deprived  the 
expiring  empire  of  every  hope  of  succor  or  delay.  It  was 
accessary  that  Constantinople  should  fall  :  but  the  magnani- 
mous resignation  of  her  emperor  bestows  an  honor  upon  her 
id  1463  *a^  which  her  prosperity  seldom  earned.  The 
lon<r  deferred  but  inevitable  moment  arrived ;  and 


Greeks,  etc.  iLARM  IN  EUROPE.  611 

the  last  of  the  Cae?ars  (I  will  not  say  of  the  Palreologi)  folded 
round  him  the  imperial  mantle,  and  remembered  the  name 
which  he  represented  in  the  dignity  of  heroic  death.  It  is 
thus  that  the  intellectual  principle,  when  enfeebled  by  disease 
or  age,  is  found  to  rally  its  energies  in  the  presence  of  death, 
and  pour  the  radiance  of  unclouded  reason  around  the  last 
struggles  of  dissolution. 

Though  the  fate  of  Constantinople  had  been  protracted 
beyond  all  reasonable  expectation,  the  actual  intel-  Alarin  ex 
ligence  operated  like  that  of  sudden  calamity,  cited  by  it 
A.  sentiment  of  consternation,  perhaps  of  self- ln  urope- 
reproach,  thrilled  to  the  heart  of  Christendom.  There 
seemed  no  longer  anything  to  divert  the  Ottoman  armies 
from  Hungary ;  and  if  Hungary  should  be  subdued,  it  was 
evident  that  both  Italy  and  the  German  empire  were  exposed 
to  invasion.1  A  general  union  of  Christian  powers  was  re- 
quired to  withstand  this  common  enemy.  But  the  popes, 
who  had  so  often  armed  them  against  each  other,  wasted  their 
spiritual  and  political  counsels  in  attempting  to  restore  una- 
nimity. War  was  proclaimed  against  the  Turks  at  the  diet 
of  Frankfort,  in  1454;  but  no  efforts  were  made  to  carry  the 
menace  into  execution.  No  prince  could  have  sat  on  the  im- 
perial throne  more  unfitted  for  the  emergency  than  Frederic 
III. ;  his  mean  spirit  and  narrow  capacity  exposed  him  to  the 
contempt  of  mankind  —  his  avarice  and  duplicity  ensured  the 
hatred  of  Austria  and  Hungary.  During  the  papacy  of  Pius 
II.,  whose  heart  was  thoroughly  engaged  in  this  legitimate 
crusade,  a  more  specious  attempt  was  made  by  convening  an 
European  congress  at  Mantua.  Almost  all  the  sovereigns 
attended  by  their  envoys ;  it  was  concluded  that  50,000  men- 
at-arms  should  be  raised,  and  a  tax  levied  for  three 
years  of  one  tenth  from  the  revenues  of  the  clergy,  ADl459- 
o:ie  thirtieth  from  those  of  the  laity,  and  one  twentieth  from 
the  capital  of  the  Jews.2     Pius  engaged  to  head  this  arma- 

i  Sive  vincitur  Hungaria,  sive  coacta         2  Spondanus.      Neither  Charles   VII. 

iungitur   Turcis,    neque    Italia    ueque  nor  even  Philip  of  Burgundy,  who  had 

Uermania  tuta  erit,  neque  satis  Rhenus  made  the  loudest  professions,  and  pledged 

(folios   s««uros   reddet.      Mn.    Sylv.    p.  himself   iu  a  fantastic    pageant   at   his 

878.    This  is  part  of  a  discourse  pro-  court,  soon  after  the  capture  of  Constan 

uounced  by  iEneas   Sylvius   before  the  tinople,  to  undertake  this  crusade,  wew 

diet  of   Frankfcrt;    which,   though    too  sincere  in  their  promises.      The  former 

declamatory,  like  most  of  his  writings,  pretended  appreheusions  of  invasion  from 

is  an  interesting  illustration  of  the  state  England,  as  an  excuse  for   sending   no 

of   Em  ope  and   of  the   impression   pro-  troops;  which,  considering  the  situation 

duced    by    that  calamity.      Spondanus,  of  England  in  1459,  was  a  bold  attemp 

id  ann.  1454,  has  giv^u   large  extracts  upon  the  credulity  of  maukiud 
from  this  oration 


612  INSTITUTION"   OF   JANIZARIES.  Chap    Vi 

meni  in  person;  bul  when  lie  appeared  next  year  al  Ancona, 
the  appointed  place  of  embarkation,  the  princes  had  failed  ir 
all  their  promises  of  men  and  money,  and  he  found  only  a 
headlong  crowd  of  adventurers,  destitute  of  every  necessary, 
and  expecting  to  be  fed  and  paid  at  the  pope's  expense.  Tt 
was  not  by  such  a  body  that  Mahomet  could  be  expelled  from 
Constantinople.  If  the  Christian  sovereigns  had  given  a 
steady  and  sincere  cooperation,  the  contest  would  still  have 
institution  of  been  arduous  and  uncertain.  In  the  early  crusades 
janizaries.  t]ie  superiority  of  arms,  of  skill,  and  even  of  dis- 
cipline, had  been  uniformly  on  the  side  of  Europe.  But  the 
present  circumstances  were  far  from  similar.  An  institution, 
begun  by  the  first  and  perfected  by  the  second  Amurath,  had 
given  to  the  Turkish  armies  what  their  enemies  still  wanted, 
military  subordination  and  veteran  experience.  Aware,  as  it 
seems,  of  the  real  superiority  of  Europeans  in  war,  these 
sultans  selected  the  stoutest  youths  from  their  Bulgarian,  Ser- 
vian, or  Albanian  captives,  who  were  educated  in  habits  of 
martial  discipline,  and  formed  into  a  regular  force  with  the 
name  of  Janizaries.  After  conquest  had  put  an  end  to  per- 
sonal captivity,  a  tax  of  every  fifth  male  child  was  raised 
upon  the  Christian  population  for  the  same  purpose.  The 
arm  of  Europe  was  thus  turned  upon  herself;  and  the  west- 
ern nations  must  have  contended  with  troops  of  hereditary 
robustness  and  intrepidity,  whose  emulous  enthusiasm  for  the 
country  that  had  adopted  them  was  controlled  by  habitual  obe- 
dience to  their  commanders.1 

1  In   the  long  declamation  of  iEneas  insight  into  European  politics;  and  hia 

Sylvius  before  the  diet  of  Frankfort  in  views   are   usually   clear    and    sensible 

1454,    he    has    the    following    contrast  Though  not  so  learned  as  some  popes,  he 

betsveen  the  European  and  Turkish  mili-  kuew  much  better  what  was  going  for- 

tia  :  a  good  specimen  of  the  artifice  with  ward  in  his  own  time.     But   the  vanity 

which  an  ingenious  orator  can  disguise  of  displaying  his  eloquence  betrayed  him 

the  truth,  while  he  seems  to  be  stating  into  a  strange  folly,  when  he  addressed  a 

it    most    precisely.      Conferamus   nunc  very  long  letter  to  Mahomet  II.,  explain- 

Turcos  et  vos  invicem  ;  et  quid  speran-  ing  the  Catholic  faith,  and  urging  him  to 

dum  sit  si  cum  illis  pugnetis,  examine-  be  baptized  ;  in  which  case,  so  far  from 

mus.     Vos  nati  ad  arma,  illi  tracti.     Vos  preaching  a  crusade  against  the  Turks, 

armati.  illi  inermes  ;  vos  gladios  versatis,  he  would  gladly  make  use  of  their  powei 

illi  cultris  utuntur  ;  vos  balistas  tenditis,  to  recover  the  rights  of  the  church.    Some 

illi  arcus  trahunt ;  vos  loricse  thoraces-  of    his    inducements    are   curious,    and 

que  protegunt,  illos  culcitra  tegit ;  vos  must,  if  made  public,  have  been  highly 

eijuos  regitis,  illi  ab  equis  reguntur  ;  vos  gratifying    to   his   friend    Frederic    lit. 

nobiles  in  bellum  ducitis,  illi  servos  aut  Quippe   ut  arbitraniur,   si    Christian  us 

artifices  cogunt,   &c.  &c.  p.  685.     This,  fuisses,  mortuo  Ladislao  Ungarise  et  Bo- 

however,  had  little  effect  upon   the  hear-  hernia'  rege,  nemo  praeter  te  sua  regna 

cs,  who  were  better  judges  of  military  fuisset  adeptns.     Sperassent  Ungari  pos< 

affairs  than  the  secretary  of  Frederic  III.  diututna  beilorum  mala  Bnb  tuo  regiin- 

Pius  II.,  or  jEnoas  Sylvius,  was  a  lively  ine  pacem,  et  illos  Bohemi   secuti    fllis- 

writer  and    a  skilful   intriguer.      Long  sent:    Bed   cnm   esses    nostras   religioni? 

experience  had  given  him  a  considerable  Imstis,  elegerunt  Ungari,  &c.  Epist.  396 


urkeks,  kto.     SUSPENSION   OF   OTTOMAN   CONQUESTS.     013 

Yet  forty  years  after  the  fall  of  Constantinople,  at  the  epoch 
of  Charles  VIII.'s  expedition  into  Italy,  the  just  Suspension  of 
apprehensions  of  European  statesmen  might  have  the  ottoman 
gradually  subsided.    Except  the  Morea,  Negropont,  con(iuests- 
and  a  few  other  unimportant  conquests,  no  real  progress  had 
been  made  by  the  Ottomans.     Mahomet  II.  had  been  kept  at 
bay  by  the   Hungarians  ;    he  had   been  repulsed  with  some 
ignominy   by   the   knights   of  St.  John    from  the    island  of 
Rhodes.      A  petty  chieftain  defied  this  mighty  conqueror  for 
twenty  years  in  the   mountains  of  Epirus ;    and  the  perse 
vering  courage   of  his  desultory  warfare  with  such  trifling 
resources,   and    so  little   prospect  of  ultimate  success,  may 
justify  the  exaggerated  admiration  with  which  his  contem- 
poraries honored  the  name  of  Scanderbeg.     Once  only  the 
crescent   was  displayed  on   the    Calabrian   coast; 
but  the  city  of   Otranto  remained  but  a  year  in  AD' 
the  possession  of  Mahomet.     On  his  death  a  disputed  suc- 
cession  involved   his   children  in    civil   war.       Bajazet,    the 
eldest,  obtained    the   victory ;  but   his    rival    brother    Zizim 
fled  to   Rhodes,  from  whence  he  was   removed  to    France, 
and    afterwards    to    Rome.       Apprehensions  of    this    exiled 
prince  seem  to  have  dictated  a  pacific  policy  to  the  i  eigning 
sultan,  whose  character  did  not  possess  the  usual  er  ergy  of 
Ottoman  sovereigns. 


H14  WEALTH   OF  THE  CHURCH.      Chat*.  VII.  Hart  i. 


CHAPTER    VII. 


HISTORY    OF    ECCLESIASTICAL    POWER    DURING    THE 
MIDDLE    AGES. 


PART   I. 


Wealth  of  the  Clergy — its  Sources — Encroachments  on  Ecclesiastical  Prone: ty  — 
their  Jurisdiction  —  arbitrative  —  coercive  —  their  political  Power  —  Supremacy 
of  the  Crown — Charlemagne  —  Change  after  his  Death,  and  Encroachments  of 
the  Church  in  the  ninth  Century  —  Primacy  of  the  See  of  Rome  —  its  early  Stage 
—  Gregory  I.  —  Council  of  Frankfort  —  false  Decretals  —  Progress  of  Papal  Au- 
thority—  Effects  of  Excommunication  —  Lothaire  —  State  of  the  Church  in  the 
tenth  Century  —  Marriage  of  Priests  —  Simony  —  Episcopal  Elections  —  Imperial 
Authority  over  the  Popes  —  Disputes  concerning  Investitures — Gregory  VII.  and 
Henry  IV.  —  Concordat  of  Calixtus  —  Election  by  Chapters  —  general  System  of 
Gregory  VII.  —  Progress  of  Papal  Usurpations  in  the  twelfth  Century  —  Inno- 
cent III.  —  his  Character  and  Schemes. 

At  the  irruption  of  the  northern  invaders  into  the  Roman 
empire  they  found  the  clergy  already  endowed  with  extensive 
possessions.  Besides  the  spontaneous  oblations  upon  which 
the  ministers  of  the  Christian  church  had  origin- 
the  church  ally  subsisted,  they  had  obtained,  even  under  the 
under  the       pagan  emperors,  bv  concealment  or  connivance  — 

empire.  i     o  i  >      j 

for  the  Roman  law  did  not  permit  a  tenure  of 
lands  in  mortmain  —  certain  immovable  estates,  the  revenues 
of  which  were  applicable  to  their  own  maintenance  and  that 
of  the  poor.1  These  indeed  were  precarious  and  liable  to 
confiscation  in  times  of  persecution.  But  it  was  among  the 
first  effects  of  the  conversion  of  Constantino  to  give  not  only 
a  security,  but  a  legal  sanction,  to  the  territorial  acquisitions 
of  the  church.  The  edict  of  Milan,  in  313,  recognizes  the 
actual  estates  of  ecclesiastical  corporations.2  Another,  pub- 
lished in  321,  grants  to  all  the  subjects  of  the  empire  the 
power  of  bequeathing  their  property  to  the  church.8     His 

1  Giannone,  Istoria  di  Napoli,  1.  ii.  c.     tion  ;    but   a  comparison   of   the   thre« 
6;  Gibbon,  c.  15   and  c.  20;  F.  Paul's    seems  to  justify  my  text. 
Treatise  on   Benefices,  c.   4.     The  last        2  Giannone ;    Gibbon,    ubi  supra;    F 
writer  does  not  wholly  confirm  this  posi-     Paul,  c.  5. 

3  Idem. 


Fcclks.  Power.  ITS   INCREASE.  I]  15 

own  liberality  and  that  of  his  successors  set  an  example 
which  did  not  want  imitators.  Passing  rapidly  from  a  con- 
dition of  distress  and  persecution  to  the  summit  of  prosperity, 
the  church  degenerated  as  rapidly  from  her  ancient  purity, 
and  forfeited  the  respect  of  future  ages  in  the  same  propor- 
tion as  she  acquired  the  blind  veneration  of  her  own.  Cov 
etousness,  especially,  became  almost  a  characteristic  vice. 
Valentinian  I.,  in  370,  prohibited  the  clergy  from  receiving 
t!nj  bequests  of  women  —  a  modification  more  discreditable 
than  any  general  law  could  have  been.  And  several  of  the 
fathers  severely  reprobate  the  prevailing  avidity  of  their 
contemporaries.1 

The  devotion  of  the  conquering  nations,  as  it  was  still  less 
enlightened  than  that  of  the  subjects  of  the  empire,  Increased 
so  was  it  still  more  munificent.  They  left  indeed  after  its 
the  worship  of  Hesus  and  Taranis  in  their  forests ;  8Ubversion- 
but  they  retained  the  elementary  principles  of  that  and  of  all 
barbarous  idolatry,  a  superstitious  reverence  for  the  priesthood, 
a  credulity  that  seemed  to  invite  imposture,  and  a  confidence 
in  the  efficacy  of  gifts  to  expiate  offences.  Of  this  temper  it 
is  undeniable  that  the  ministers  of  religion,  influenced  prob- 
ably not  so  much  by  personal  covetousness  as  by  zeal  for  the 
interests  of  their  order,  took  advantage.  Many  of  the  pecu- 
liar and  prominent  characteristics  in  the  faith  and  discipline 
of  those  ages  appear  to  have  been  either  introduced  or  sedu- 
lously promoted  for  the  purposes  of  sordid  fraud.  To  those 
purposes  conspired  the  veneration  for  relics,  the  worship  of 
images,  the  idolatry  of  saints  and  martyrs,  the  religious  in- 
violability of  sanctuaries,  the  consecration  of  cemeteries,  but, 
above  all,  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  and  masses  for  the  relief 
of  the  dead.  A  creed  thus  contrived,  operating  upon  the 
minds  of  barbarians,  lavish  though  rapacious,  and  devout 
though  dissolute,  naturally  caused  a  torrent  of  opulence  to 
pour  in  upon  the  church.  Donations  of  land  were  contin- 
ually made  to  the  bishops,  and,  in  still  more  ample  proportion, 
to  the  monastic  foundations.  These  had  not  been  very 
numerous  in  the  West  till  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century 
when  Benedict  established  his  celebrated  rule.2  A  more 
remarkable   show  of  piety,  a  more   absolute   seclusion   from 

i  Giannnone,  ubi  supra  ;  F.  Paul,  c.  6.     ienie  Diseours  sur  mist.  Ecclesiastique 
2  Giannone,  1.   iii.  c.  6 ;  1.  iv.  c.  12;     Mura tori.  Dissert.  66. 
Treatise  on  Benefices,  c.  8;  Fleury,  Huit 


i,ii;  WEALTH   OF   THE  CHURCH      Chat    VII    Part  1 

the  world,  forms  more  impressive  and  edifying  prayers  and 
masses  more  constantly  repeated,  gave  to  the  professed  in 
these  institutions  an  advantage,  in  public  est<  em,  over  the 
secular  -clergy. 

The  ecclesiastical  hierarchy  never  received  any  territorial 
endowment  by  law,  either  under  the  Roman  empire  or  the 
kingdoms  erected  upon  its  ruins.  But  the  voluntary  munifi- 
cence of  princes,  as  well  as  their  subjects,  amply  supplied  the 
place  of  a  more  universal  provision.  Large  private  estates, 
or.  as  they  were  termed,  patrimonies,  not  only  within  their 
own  dioceses,  but  sometimes  in  distant  countries,  sustained 
the  dignity  of  the  principal  sees,  and  especially  that  of  Rome.1 
The  French  monarchs  of  the  first  dynasty,  the  Carlovingian 
family  and  their  great  chief,  the  Saxon  line  of  emperors,  the 
kings  of  England  and  Leon,  set  hardly  any  bounds  to  their 
liberality,  as  numerous  charters  still  extant  in  diplomatic 
collections  attest.  Many  churches  possessed  seven  or  eight 
thousand  rnansi ;  one  with  but  two  thousand  passed  for  only 
indifferently  rich.2  But  it  must  be  remarked  that  many  of 
these  donations  are  of  lands  uncultivated  and  unappropriated. 
The  monasteries  acquired  legitimate  riches  by  the  culture  of 
these  deserted  tracts  and  by  the  prudent  management  of  their 
revenues,  which  were  less  exposed  to  the  ordinary  means  of 
dissipation  than  those  of  the  laity.  Their  wealth,  continually 
accumulated,  enabled  them  to  become  the  regular  purchasers 
of  landed  estates,  especially  in  the  time  of  the  crusades, 
when  the  fiefs  of  the  nobility  were  constantly  in  the  market 
for  sale  or  mort^ase.4 

If  the  possessions  of  ecclesiastical  communities  had  all 
Sometimes  ')een  a**  ^l^J  earned,  we  could  find  nothing  in 
improperly  them  to  reprehend.  But  other  sources  of  wealth 
acqune  .  were  ie^s  pure,  and  they  derived  their  wealth  from 
many  sources.  Those  who  entered  into  a  monastery  threw 
frequently  their  whole  estates  into  the  common  stock ;  and 
even  the  children  of  rich  parents  were  expected  to  make  a 
donation  of  land  on  assuming  the  cowl.  Some  gave  their 
property  to  the  Church  before  entering  on  military  expedi- 
tions; gifts  were  made  by  some  to  take  effect  after  their 
lives,  and  bequests   by  many  in   the   terrors   of  dissolution. 

1  St.  Marc,  t.  i.  p.  281 ;  Giannone,   1.        3  Muratori,  Dissert.  65 ;  Du  Cauge    v 
v.  C.  12  Eremua. 

I  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  205.  *  Heeren,   Essai  sur  les  Croisades,  p 

166;  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  p.  293. 


Eccles.  Power.    SOMETIMES   IMPROPERLY   ACQUIRED.        6 1  7 

Even  those  legacies  to  charitable  purposes,  which  the  clergy 
could  with  more  decency  and  speciousness  recommend,  and 
of  which  the  administration  was  generally  confined  to  them, 
were  frequently  applied  to  their  own  benefit.1  They  failed 
not,  above  all,  to  inculcate  upon  the  wealthy  sinner  that  no 
atonement  could  be  so  acceptable  to  Heaven  as  liberal  presents 
to  its  earthly  delegates.'2  To  die  without  allotting  a  portion 
of  worldly  wealth  to  pious  uses  was  accounted  almost  like 
suicide,  or  a  refusal  of  the  last  sacraments ;  and  hence  intes- 
tacy passed  for  a  sort  of  fraud  upon  the  church,  which  she 
punished  by  taking  the  administration  of  the  deceased's  effects 
into  her  own  hands.  This,  however,  was  peculiar  to  England, 
and  seems  to  have  been  the  case  there  only  from  the  reign  of 
Henry  III.  to  that  of  Edward  III.,  when  the  bishop  took  a 
portion  of  the  intestate's  personal  estate  for  the  advantage  of 
the  church  and  poor,  instead  of  distributing  it  among  his 
next  of  kin.3  The  canonical  penances  imposed  upon  repent- 
ant offenders,  extravagantly  severe  in  themselves,  were  com- 
muted for  money  or  for  immovable  possessions  —  a  fertile 
though  scandalous  source  of  monastic  wealth,  which  the  popes 
afterwards  diverted  into  their  own  coffers  by  the  usage  of 
dispensations  and  indulgences.4  The  church  lands  enjoyed 
an  immunity  from  taxes,  though  not  in  general  from  military 
service,  when  of  a  feudal  tenure.5  But  their  tenure  was 
frequently  in  what  was  called  frankalmoign,  without  any 
obligation  of  service.     Hence   it  became  a  customary  fraud 

1  Primo  sacris  pastoribus  data  est  fa-  benter,  et  ardentissimo  animo  ego  ac- 
cultas,  ut  hasreditatis  portio  in  pauperes    cepi. 

et    egenos     dispergeretur;    sed    sensini  :J  Selden,  vol.   iii.    p.    1676;    Prynne'a 

ecclesiae  quoque  in    pauperum   censum  Constitutions,  vol.  iii.  p.  18;  Blackstone. 

veuerunt,  atque  iutestatae  gentis  mens  vol.  ii.  chap.  32.     In  France  the   lord  ol 

creditaest  proclivior  in  eas  futura  fuisse  :  the  fief  seems  to  have  taken  the  whole 

qua  ex  re  pinguius  illarum  patrimonium  spoil.     Dn  Cange,  v.  Intestatus. 

evasit.     linmo  episcopi  ipsi  in  rem  suam  4  Muratori,  Dissert.  68. 

ejusmodi  consuetudinem  interdum  eon-  3  Palgrave  has  shown  that  the  Anglo- 

vertebant:    ac    tributum     evasit,    quod  Saxon  clergy  were  not  exempt,  originally 

antea  pii  moris  fuit.     Muratori,  Antiqui-  at  least,  from  the  trinoda  necessitas  iui- 

tates  Jtalias.  t.  v.  Dissert.  67.  posed   on   all  alodial  proprietors.     They 

2  Muratori,  Dissert.  67  (Antiquit.  were  better  treated  on  the  Continent; 
Italiae,  t.  v.  p.  1055),  has  preserved  a  and  Boniface  exclaims  that  in  no  part  of 
curious  charter  of  an  Italian  count,  who  the  world  was  such  servitude  imposed  on 
declares  that,  struck  with  reflections  the  church  as  among  the  English.  Eng- 
upon  his  sinful  state,  he  had  taken  lish  Commonwealth,  i.  158.  But  when 
counsel  with  certaiu  religious  how  he  we  look  at  the  charters  collected  in  Kem- 
should  atone  for  his  offences.  Accepto  ble's  Codex  Diplomatic  us  (most  or  near 
consilio  ab  iis,  excepto  si  renunciare  ly  all  of  them  in  favor  of  the  church), 
saeculo  possero,  nullum  esse  melius  inter  we  shall  hardly  think  they  were  ill  off, 
eleemosinaruin  virtutes,  quain  si  de  pro-  though  they  might  be  forced  sometimes 
priis  meis  substantias  in  monasterium  to  repair  a  bridge,  or  send  their  UmanU 
concederem.      Hoc  consilium  ab  iis  li-  against  the  Danes 


CIS  TITHES.  Chap.  VIL  Pabt  1 

of  lay  proprietors  to  grant  estates  to  the  church,  which  they 
received  again  by  way  of  lief  or  lease,  exempted  from  public 
burdens.  And,  as  if  all  these  means  of  accumulating  what 
they  could  not  legitimately  enjoy  were  insufficient,  the  monks, 
prostituted  their  knowledge  of  writing  to  the  purpose  of 
forging  charters  in  their  own  favor,  which  might  easily  im- 
pose upon  an  ignorant  age,  since  it  has  required  a  peculiar 
science  to  detect  them  in  modern  times.  Such  rapacity  might 
eeem  incredible  in  men  cut  oft'  from  the  pursuits  of  life  and 
the  hope  of  posterity,  if  we  did  not  behold  every  day  the 
unreasonableness  of  avarice  and  the  fervor  of  professional 
attachments.1 

As  an  additional  source  of  revenue,  and  in  imitation  of 
the  Jewrish  law,  the  payment  of  tithes  was  recom- 
mended or  enjoined.  These,  however,  were  not 
applicable  at  first  to  the  maintenance  of  a  resident  clergy. 
Parochial  divisions,  as  they  now  exist,  did  not  take  place,  at 
least  in  some  countries,  till  several  centuries  after  the  estab- 
lishment of  Christianity.'2  The  rural  churches,  erected  suc- 
cessively as  the  necessities  of  a  congregation  required,  or 
the  piety  of  a  landlord  suggested,  were  in  fact  a  sort  of 
chapels  dependent  on  the  cathedral,  and  served  by  itinerant 
ministers  at   the   bishop's   discretion.8     The   bishop   himself 


1  Muratori's  65th,  67th,  and  68th  Dis-  gantur ;  et  si  laicus  icloneum  utilemque 

Bertations   on    the   Antiquities   of   Italy  clericum  obtulerit  nulla   qualibet   ocea- 

have  furnished  the  principal  materials  of  sione  ab  episcopo  sine  ratione  certa  re- 

my  text,  with  Father  Paul's  Treatise  on  pellatur ;    et  si   rejiciendus   est,    propter 

Benefices,    especially   chaps.    19  and  29.  scandalum    vitandum    evidenti    ratione 

Gianuoue,  loc.  cit.  and  1.  iv.  c.   12  ;  1.  v.  manifestetur.':      Another  capitulary  of 

c.  6;  1.  x.  c.  12.     Schmidt,  Hist.  des.  Alle-  Charles  the  Bald,  in  864,  forbids  the  es- 

niands.  t.  i.  p.  370;  t.  ii.  p.  203,  462;  t.  rablishment  of  priests  in    the  churches 

iv.  p.  202.     Fleury,  III.      Disconrs   sur  of  patrons,  or  their  ejection  without  the 

l'Hist.   Eccles.     Du  Gauge,  voc.  Preearia.  bishop's   consent:  —  "  De   his    qui    sine 

-  Muratori,  Dissert.  74.  and  Fleury,  In-  consensu  episcopi  presbyteros  n  eoclesih 
Btitutions  au  Droit  ecclesiastique,  t.  i.  p.  suis  constituunt,  vel  de  ecclesiis  dejici- 
162,  nfVr  (lie  origin  of  parishes  to  the  unt."  Thus  the  churches  are  recognized 
fourth  century  ;  but  this  must  be  limited  as  the  property  of  the  lord;  and  the  par- 
te the  most  populous  part  of  the  em-  ish  may  be  considered  as  au  established 
pire.  division,    at    least    very    commonly,    so 

:i  These  were  not  always  itinerant ;  early  as  the  Carlovingian  empire.  I  do 
commonly,  perhaps,  they  were  depend-  not  by  any  means  deny  that  it  was  par- 
ante  Of  the  lord,  appointed  by  the  bishop  tially  known  in  France  before  that  time, 
on  his  nomination.  —  Lehuerou,  institut.  Ouizot  reckons  the  patronage  ol 
Carotingiennes,  p.  526,  who  quotes  a  ca-  churches  by  the  laity  among  the  circum- 
pitul.try  of  the  emperor  Lothaire  in  825.  stances  which  diminished  or  retarded 
uDe  clericis  vero  laicorum.  unde  non-  ecclesiastical  power.  (Leconl3)  It  may 
nulli  lorum  conquer!  videantur,  eo  quod  have  been  so;  but  without  this  patronage 
QUidam  episcopi  adeorum  preces  nolint  there  would  have  been  very  few  parish 
in  ecolesus  suis  eos,  cum  utiles sint,  ordi-  churches.  It  separated,  in  some  degree, 
nare,  visum  nobis  ftut,  ut  ....  et  cum  the  interests  of  the  secular  clergy  frmt 
taritate  et  ratione    utiles  et  idonei    eli-  those  of  the  bishops  and  the  regulars 


Socles.  Power.  TITHES.  619 

received  the  tithes,  and  apportioned  them  as  he  thought  fi: 
A  capitulary  of  Charlemagne,  however,  regulates  their  division 
iiito  three  parts ;  one  for  the  bishop  and  his  clergy,  a  second 
for  the  poor,  and  a  third  for  the  support  of  the  fabric  of  the 
church.1  Some  of  the  rural  churches  obtained  by  episcopal 
concessions  the  privileges  of  baptism  and  burial,  which  were 
accompanied  with  a  fixed  share  of  tithes,  and  seem  to  imply 
the  residence  of  a  minister.  The  same  privileges  were  grad- 
ually extended  to  the  rest;  and  thus  a  complete  parochial 
division  was  finally  established.  But  this  was  hardly  th 
case  in  England  till  near  the  time  of  the  conquest.2 

The  slow  and  gradual  manner  in  which  parochial  churches 
became  independent  appears  to  be  of  itself  a  sufficient  an- 
swer to  those  who  ascribe  a  great  antiquity  to  the  universal 
payment  of  tithes.  There  are,  however,  more  direet  proofs 
that  this  species  of  ecclesiastical  property  was  acquired  not 
only  by  degrees  but  with  considerable  opposition.  We  find 
the  payment  of  tithes  first  enjoined  by  the  canons  of  a  pro- 
vincial council  in  France  near  the  end  of*  the  sixth  century 
From  the  ninth  to  the  end  of  the  twelfth,  or  even  later,  it 
is  continually  enforced  by  similar  authority.3  Father  Paul 
remarks  that  most  of  the  sermons  preached  about  the  eighth 
century  inculcate  this  as  a  duty,  and  even  seem  to  place  the 
summit  of  Christian  perfection  in  its  performance.4  This 
reluctant  submission  of  the  people  to  a  general  and  perma- 
nent tribute  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  eagerness  dis- 
played by  them  in  accumulating  voluntary  donations  upon  the 
church.  Charlemagne  was  the  first  who  gave  the  confirmation 
of  a  civil  statute  to  these  ecclesiastical  injunctions ;  no  one  at 
least  has,  so  far  as  I  know,  adduced  any  earlier  law  for  the 
payment  of  tithes  than  one  of  his  capitularies.6  But  it  would 
be  precipitate  to  infer  either  that  the  practice  had  not  already 
gained  ground  to  a  considerable  extent,  through  the  influence 
of  ecclesiastical  authority,  or,  on  the  other  hand,  that  it  became 

1  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p  206.  This  seems  to  remarkable  rashness,  attacked  the  cur 
have  been  fouuded  ou  an  ancient  canon,  rent  opinion  that  Charlemagne  estab- 
P.  Paul,  c.  7.  lished  the  legal  obligation  of  tithes,  and 

2  CJollier's  Ecclesiastical  Hi*  tory,  p.  229.  denied  that  any  of  his  capitularies  bear 

3  Selden's  History  of  Tithes,  vol.  iii.  such  an  interpretation.  Those  which  he 
p.  1108,  edit.  Wilkins.  Tithes  are  said  quotes  have  indeed  a  different  meaning  ; 
by  Giannone  to  have  been  enforced  by  but  he  has  overlooked  an  express  enact- 
Bome  papal  decrees  in  the  sixth  century,  ment  in  789  (Baluzii  Capitularia,  t.  i. 
1.  iii   c.  6.  p.  253),  which  admits   of  no   question  ; 

*  Treatise  on  Benefices,  c.  11.  and  I   believe   that  there  are   others    ir 

5  Mably,    (Observations  sur  l'Hist.  de    confirmation 
France,   t.   i.   p.   238  et  438)  has,   with 


020  SPOLIATION   OF   CHURCH   PROPERTY.    Chap.  VII.  Pakf  1 

universal  in  consequence  of  the  commands  of  Charlemagne.1 
In  the  subsequent  age-  it  was  very  common  to  appropriate 
tithes,  which  had  originally  been  payable  to  the  bishop,  either 
towards  the  support  of  particular  churches,  or,  according  to 
the  prevalent  superstition,  to  monastic  foundations.9  These 
arbitrary  consecrations,  though  the  subject  of  complaint, 
lasted,  by  a  sort  of  prescriptive  right  of  the  landholder,  till 
about  the  year  1200.  It  was  nearly  at  the  same  time  that 
the  obligation  of  paying  tithes,  which  had  been  originally 
confined  to  those  called  predial,  or  the  fruits  of  the  earth, 
was  extended,  at  least  in  theory,  to  every  species  of  profit, 
and  to  the  wages  of  every  kind  of  labor.3 

Yet  there  were  many  hindrances  that  thwarted  the  clergy 
s  oiiation  m  tne^r  acquisition  of  opulence,  and  a  sort  of  reflux 
jf  church  that  set  sometimes  very  strongly  against  them.  In 
proper  y.  times  of  barbarous  violence  nothing  can  thoroughly 
compensate  for  the  inferiority  of  physical  strength  and 
prowess.  The  ecclesiastical  history  of  the  middle  ages  pre- 
sents one  long  contention  of  fraud  against  robbery  ;  of  acqui- 
sitions made  by  the  church  through  such  means  as  I  have 
described,  and  torn  from  her  by  lawless  power.  Those  very 
men  who  in  the  hour  of  sickness  and  impending  death 
showered  the  gifts  of  expiatory  devotion  upon  her  altars,  had 
passed  the  sunshine  of  their  lives  in  sacrilegious  plunder. 
Notwithstanding  the  frequent  instances  of  extreme  reverence 
for  religious  institutions  among  the  nobility,  we  should  be 
deceived  in  supposing  this  to  be  their  general  character. 
Rapacity,  not  less  insatiable  than  that  of  the  abbots,  was 
commonly  united  with  a  daring  fierceness  that  the  abbots 
could  not  resist.4     In  every  country  we  find  continual  lamen- 

i  The  grant  of   Ethelwolf  in  855  has  have  been  for  life,   but  were  frequently 

appeared  to  some  antiquaries  the  most  renewed.     They  are, not  to  be  confounded 

probable  origin    of  the  general  right  to  with   terra  censnales.  or  lands   let  to  a 

tithes  in  England  [Note   I.]    It  is  said  tenant    at    rack-rent,   which    of   course 

by   Marina  that  tithes  were   not  legally  formed  a  considerable  branch  of  revenue. 

established   in    Castile  till   the  reign  of  The  grant  was  called  prerarin  from  being 

Alfonso  X.     Ensayo  sobre  les  Siete  Par-  obtained  at    the    prayer  of   a  grantee  ; 

ti<las.  c.  359.  and  the  uncertainty  of  its  renewal  seems 

-  Selden,  p.  1114  et  seq.;  Coke,  2  Inst,  to  have  given  rise  to  the  adjective  pre 

p.  641.  carious. 

'■'  Seldcn's  History  of  Tithes;  Treatise  In  the  ninth  century,  though  the  pre- 

on  Benefices,  c.  28;  Giannone,  1.  x.  c.  12.  tensions  of  the  bishops  were  never  higher, 

4  The  church  was  often  compelled  to  the  church   itself  was  more  pillaged  un- 

frrri ii r  !<■  tses  i  it'  her  lands,  under  the  name  der    pretext   of  these  precarirr,   and  in 

of  precarirr,    to   laymen,   who   probably  other  ways,  than  at  any  former  time.  — 

rendered  littlo  or  no   service  in  return,  See  Du  Cange  for  a  long  article  on  Pre 

though  ;i  rent  or  census  was  expressed  in  cariae. 
he  instrument      These  precaria  seem  to 


Eccles.  Power.    SPOLIATION  OF  CHURCH  PROPERTY.       fi21 

tation  over  the  plunder  of  ecclesiastical  possessions.  Charles 
Martel  is  reproached  with  having  given  the  first  notorious 
example  of  such  spoliation.  It  was  not,  however,  commonly 
practised  by  sovereigns.  But  the  evil  was  not  the  less  uni- 
versally felt.  The  parochial  tithes  especially,  as  the  hand  of 
robbery  falls  heaviest  upon  the  weak,  were  exposed  to  unlaw- 
ful'seizure.  In  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries  nothing  was 
more  common  than  to  see  the  revenues  of  benefices  in  the 
hands  of  lay  impropriators,  who  employed  curates  at  the 
cheapest  rate  ;  an  abuse  that  has  never  ceased  in  the  church.1 
Several  attempts  were  made  to  restore  these  tithes  ;  but  even 
Gregory  VII.  did  not  venture  to  proceed  in  it ; 2  and  indeed 
it  is  highly  probable  that  they  might  be  held  in  some  instances 
by  a  lawful  title.3  Sometimes  the  property  of  monasteries 
was  dilapidated  by  corrupt  abbots,  whose  acts,  however  clan- 
destine and  unlawful,  it  was  not  easy  to  revoke.  And  both 
the  bishops  and  convents  were  obliged  to  invest  powerful  lay 
protectors,  under  the  name  of  advocates,  with  considerable 
liefs,  as  the  price  of  their  assistance  against  depredators. 
But  these  advocates  became  too  often  themselves  the  spoilers, 
and  oppressed  the  helpless  ecclesiastics  for  whose  defence 
they  had  been  engaged.4 

If  it  had  not  been  for  these  drawbacks,  the  clergy  must, 
one  would  imagine,  have  almost  acquired  the  exclusive 
property  of  the  soil.  They  did  enjoy,  according  to  some 
authorities,  nearly  one  half  of  England,  and,  I  believe,  a 
greater  proportion  in  some  countries  of  Europe.5  They  had 
reached,  perhaps,  their  zenith  in  respect  of  territorial  prop- 

i  Du  Cange,  voc.  Abbas.  saurus  Anecdotorum,  t.  i.  p.  595.    Vais- 

-  Scbmidt,  t  iv.  p.  204.     At  an  assem-  sette.  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii.  p.  109, 

bly  held  at  St.  Denis  in  997  the  bishops  and  Appendix,  passim, 
proposed  to  restore  the  tithes  to  the  secu-        6  Turner's   Hist,  of   England,  vol    ii. 

lar  clergy;  but  such  a  tumult  was  ex-  p.   413,  from  Avesbury.     According  to  a 

cited  by  this  attempt,  that  the  meeting  calculation    founded    on    a    passage    in 

was  broken  up.     Kecueil  des  Historiens,  Kuyghtou,   the  revenue  of  the  English 

t.  xi.  praefat.  p.  212.  church  in    1337    amounted   to    730,000 

3  Selden's    Hist,    of   Tithes,   p.   1136.  marks   per  annum.     Macpherson's  An- 

The  third  council  of  Lateran  restrains  nals   of  Commerce,  vol.  i.   p.  519  ;    Uis- 

laymen   from    transferring   their  impro-  toire  du  Droit  public   Eccles.     Francois, 

priated  tithes  to  other  laymen.     Velly,  t.    i.  p.   214.     Anthony   Harmer  (Henry 

Hist,  de  France,  t.  iii.  p.  235.     This  seems  Wharton)  says  that  the  monasteries  did 

tacitly  to  admit  that  their  possession  was  not  possess  one  fifth  of  the  land  ;  and  I 

.awful,  at  least  by  prescription.  incline   to  thiuk  that  he   is  nearer  the 

■  4  For    the    injuries    sustained    by   ec-  truth   than  Mr.  Turner,  who   puts   the 

clesiastical    proprietors,     see    Muratori,  wealth   of  the  church    at  above  28,000 

Dissert.    72.    Du    Cange,  v.  Advocatus.  knights' fees  out  of  53,215.    The  bishops 

Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  220,  470;  t.  iii.  p.  290;  lands  could  not  by  any  means   account 

t.  iv.  p.  188,  202.    Kecueil  des  Historiens,  for  the  difference ;  so  that  Mr.  Turnei 

t.  xi.  praefat.    p.  184.    Marteune,   The-  was  probably  deceived  by  his  authority 


622  ECCLESIASTICAL  JURISDICTION.      Chap.  VII.  Paut  I 

erty  about  Hie  conclusion  of  the  twelfth  century.1  After  thai 
time  the  disposition  to  enrich  the  clergy  by  pious  donation- 
grew  more  languid,  and  was  put  under  certain  legal  restraints, 
to  which  I  shall  hereafter  advert;  but  they  became  rather 
more  secure  from  forcible  usurpation.-;. 

The  acquisitions  of  wealth  by  the  church  were  hardly  so 
Ecciesias-  remarkable,  and  scarcely  contributed  so  much  to 
Sfa JUri8  ^ier  oreatuess>  as  those  innovations  upon  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  justice  which  fall  under  the  head 
of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  and  immunity.  It  is  hardly, 
perhaps,  necessary  to  caution  the  reader  that  rights  of  terri- 
torial justice,  possessed  by  ecclesiastics  in  virtue  of  their 
fiefs,  are  by  no  means  included  in  this  description.  Episcopal 
jurisdiction,  properly  so  called,  may  be  considered  as  depend- 
ing upon  the  choice  of  litigant  parties,  upon  their  condition, 
and  upon  the  subject-matter  of  their  differences. 

1.  The  arbitrative  authority  of  ecclesiastical  pastors,  if  not 
Arbitrative.  ^eval  witn  Christianity,  grew  up  very  early  in  the 
church,  and  was  natural,  or  even  necessary,  to  an 
insulated  and  persecuted  society.2  Accustomed  to  feel  a  strong 
aversion  to  the  imperial  tribunals,  and  even  to  consider  a  re- 
currence to  them  as  hardly  consistent  with  their  profession, 
the  early  Christians  retained  somewhat  of  a  similar  prejudice 
even  after  the  establishment  of  their  religion.  The  arbitra- 
tion of  their  bishops  still  seemed  a  less  objectionable  mode 
of  settling  differences.  And  this  arbitrative  jurisdiction  was 
powerfully  supported  by  a  law  of  Constantine,  which  directed 
the  civil  magistrate  to  enforce  the  execution  of  episcopal 
awards.  Another  edict,  ascribed  to  the  same  emperor,  and 
annexed  to  the  Theodosian  code,  extended  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  bishops  to  all  causes  which,  either  party  chose  to  refer  to 
it,  even  where  they  had  ah-eady  commenced  in  a  secular 
court,  and  declared  the  bishop's  sentence  not  subject  to  appeal. 
This  edict  has  clearly  been  proved  to  be  a  forgery.  It  is 
evident,  by  a  novel  of  Valentinian  III.,  about  450,  that  the 
church  had  still  no  jurisdiction  in  questions  of  a  temporal 

l  The    great    age  of    monasteries    in  2  \  Corinth,  v.  4.     The  word  k&V&S- 

England   was    the  reigns  of   Henry  I.,  VTjfiivovg,  rendered  in  our  version  "of* 

Stephen,    and    Henry    IT.      Lyttelton's  no  reputation,"  has  been  interpreted  by 

Henry  II.  vol.  ii.  p.  329.     David  I.    of  some  to  mean  persons  destitute  of  coer- 

Scotland,  contemporary  with  Henry  II.,  cive  authority,  referees.     The  passage  :il 

was  also  a  noted  founder  of  monasteries,  least  tends  to   discourage  suits  before  a 

Dairy  m  ple'<?  Annals.  secular  judge 


Fc<les.  Power.      ECCLESIASTICAL  JURISDICTION.  G23 

nature,  except  by  means  of  the  joint  reference  of  contending 
parties.  Some  expressions,  indeed,  used  by  the  emperoi° 
seem  intended  to  repress  the  spirit  of* encroachment  upon  the 
civil  magistrates,  which  had  probably  begun  to  manifest  itself. 
Charlemagne,  indeed,  in  one  of  his  capitularies,  is  said  by 
some  modern  writers  to  have  repeated  all  the  absurd  and  enor- 
mous provisions  of  the  spurious  constitution  in  the  Theodosian 
code.1  But  this  capitulary  is  erroneously  ascribed  to  Charle- 
magne. It  is  only  found  in  one  of  the  three  books  subjoined 
by  Benedict  Levita  to  the  four  books  of  capitularies  collected 
by  Ansegisus ;  these  latter  relating  only  to  Charlemagne  and 
Louis,  but  the  others  comprehending  many  of  later  emperors 
and  kings.  And,  what  is  of  more  importance,  it  seems  ex- 
ceedingly doubtful  whether  this  is  any  genuine  capitulary  at 
all.  •  It  is  not  referred  to  any  prince  by  name,  nor  is  it  found 
in  any  other  collection.  Certain  it  is  that  we  do  not  find  the 
church,  in  her  most  arrogant  temper,  asserting  the  full  privi- 
leges contained  in  this  capitulary.2 

2.  If  it  was  considered  almost  as  a  general  obligation  upon 
the  primitive  Christians  to  decide  their  civil  dis-  n 

.         i         •    ,  ii'.  ,  Coercive  over 

pines  by  internal  arbitration,  much  more  would  the  clergy  in 
this  be  incumbent  upon  the  clergy.  The  canons  civil 
of  several  councils,  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  sentence 
a  bishop  or  priest  to  deposition,  who  should  bring  any  suit, 
civil  or  even  criminal,  before  a  secular  magistrate.  This 
must,  it  should  appear,  be  confined  to  causes  where  the  de- 
fendant was  a  clerk ;  since  the  ecclesiastical  court  had  hith- 
erto noncoercive  jurisdiction  over  the  laity.  It  was  not  so 
easy  to  induce  laymen,  in  their  suits  against  clerks,  to  prefer 
the  episcopal  tribunal.  The  emperors  were  not  at  all  dis- 
posed to  favor  this  species  of  encroachment  till  the  reign  of 
Justinian,  who  ordered  civil  suits  against  ecclesiastics  to  be 
carried  only  before  the  bishops.  Yet  this  was  accompanied 
by  a  provision  that  a  party  dissatisfied  with  the  sentence 
might  apply  to  the  secular  magistrate,  not  as  an  appellant, 
but  a  coordinate  jurisdiction  ;  for  if  different  judgments  were 
given  in  the  two  courts,  the  process  was  ultimately  referred 
to  the  emperor.3     But  the  early  Merovingian  kings  adopted 

i  Baluzii  Capitularia,  t.  i.  p.  9018.  p.  1.     Memoires  de  l'Acadeinie   des   In- 

2  Gibbon,  c.  xx.    Giannone,  1.  ii.  c.  8;  scriptions,  t.  xxxix.  p.  566. 

oao°    V   L  ^   c-  7'     Schmidt>  '■  »•  3  This  was  also  established  about  the 

p.  208.      lleury,  /me  Discours,  and  In-  same    time    by   Athalaric    king   of  th< 

«titutions  au  Droit  Ecclesiastique   t.  ii.  Ostrogoths,  and  of  course   affected   tb 


C24  ECCLESIASTICAL  JURISDICTION.      Chap.  VII.  1'art  1 

the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  bishop  over  causes  wherein 
clerks  were  interested,  without  any  of  the  checks  which  Jus- 
tinian had  provided.  Many  law.-  enacted  during  their  reigns, 
and  under  Charlemagne,  strictly  prohibit  the  temporal  mag- 
istrates from  entertaining  complaints  against  the  children  of 
the  church. 

This  jurisdiction  over  the  civil  causes  of  clerks  was  not 
and  criminal  immediately  attended  with  an  equally  exclusive 
suits.  cognizance  of  criminal  offences  imputed  to  them, 

wherein  the  state  is  so  deeply  interested,  and  the  church  could 
inflict  so  inadequate  a  punishment.  Justinian  appears  to  have 
reserved  such  offences  for  trial  before  the  imperial  magistrate, 
though  with  a  material  provision  that  the  sentence  against  a 
clerk  should  not  be  executed  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop 
or  the  final  decision  of  the  emperor.  The  bishop  is  not'  ex- 
pressly invested  with  this  controlling  power  by  the  laws  of 
the  Merovingians ;  but  they  enact  that  he  must  be  present  at 
the  trial  of  one  of  his  clerks  ;  which  probably  was  intended 
to  declare  the  necessity  of  his  concurrence  in  the  judgment. 
The  episcopal  order  was  indeed  absolutely  exempted  from 
secular  jurisdiction  by  Justinian ;  a  privilege  which  it  had 
vainly  endeavored  to  establish  under  the  earlier  emperors. 
France  permitted  the  same  immunity ;  Chilperic,  one  of  the 
most  arbitrary  of  her  kings,  did  not  venture  to  charge  some 
of  his  bishops  with  treason,  except  before  a  council  of  their 
brethren.  Finally,  Charlemagne  seems  to  have  extended  to 
the  whole  body  of  the  clergy  an  absolute  exemption  from  the 
judicial  authority  of  the  magistrate.1 

3.  The  character  of  a  cause,  as  well  as  of  the  parties  en- 
gaged, might  bring  it  within  the  limits  of  eccle- 

Over  o    ©      '         o  o 

particular       siastical   jurisdiction.       In    all    questions    simply 

religious    the    church    had    an    original    right    of 

decision ;  in  those  of  a  temporal  nature  the  civil  magistrate 

had,  by  the  imperial  constitution,  as  exclusive  an  authority.2 

popes  who  were  his  subjects.     St.  Marc,  general  (Baluz.  Capitul.  t.  i.  p.  227);  and 

t.  i.  p.  60;  Fleury,  Hist.  Eccles.  t.  vii.  the  same  is  expressed  still  more  forcibly 

p.  292.  in  the  collection  published  by  Ansegisus 

1  Memoires  de  l'A'&deniie,  ubi  supra;  under  Louis  the  Debonair.     (Id.  p.  904 

Giannone,  1.  hi.  c.  6;  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  236;  and  1115)    See  other  proofs  in  Fleury, 

Henry,  ubi  supra.  Hist.  Eccles.  t.  ix.  p.  607. 

Some  of  these  writers  do  not  state  the        2  Quoties  de  religione  agitur,  episcopos 

law  of  Charlemagne  so  strongly.     Never-  oportet  judicare  :  alteras  vero  causas  quae 

theleSB  the  words  of  a  capitulary  in  789,  ad  ordinarios    cognitores   vel   ad    usum 

Ut  clerici  ecclesiastici  ordinis  si  culpam  publici  juris   pertinent,  legibus  oportet 

tnourrerint  apud  eoolesiasticos  judicen-  audiri.      Lex   Arcadii   et  Honorii    a  pin? 

tur  non  apud  sseculares,  are  sufficiently  Mem.  de  l'Academie,  t.  xxxix   p.  571. 


Eccles.  Power.      POLITICAL   POWER  OF  CLERGY.  025 

Later  ages  witnessed  strange  innovations  in  this  respect,  when 
the  spiritual  courts  usurped,  under  sophistical  pretences,  almost 
the  whole  administration  of  justice.  But  these  encroachments 
were  not,  I  apprehend,  very  striking  till  the  twelfth  century ; 
and  as  about  the  same  time  measures,  more  or  less  vigorous 
and  successful,  began  to  be  adopted  in  order  to  restrain  them, 
I  shall  defer  this  part  of  the  subject  for  the  present. 

In  this   -ketch  of  the  riches  and  jurisdiction  of  the  hie- 
rarchy I  may  seem  to  have  implied  their  political  „  ,'.  . 

•    n  i  •    i  ,,         l  r.  ,  Political 

influence,  which  is  naturally  connected  with  the  power  of 
two  former.  They  possessed,  however,  more  di-  clergy' 
rect  means  of  acquiring  temporal  power.  Even  under  the 
Roman  emperors  they  had  found  their  road  into  palaces  ;  they 
were  sometimes  ministers,  more  often  secret  counsellors, 
always  necessary  but  formidable  allies,  whose  support  was 
to  be  conciliated,  and  interference  to  be  respected.  But  they 
assumed  a  far  more  decided  influence  over  the  new  kingdoms 
of  the  West.  They  were  entitled,  in  the  first  place,  by  the 
nature  of  those  free  governments,  to  a  privilege  unknown 
under  the  imperial  despotism,  that  of  assisting  in  the  delib- 
erative assemblies  of  the  nation.  Councils  of  bishops,  such 
as  had  been  convoked  by  Constantine  and  his  successors,  were 
limited  in  their  functions  to  decisions  of  faith  or  canons  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline.  But  the  northern  nations  did  not  so 
well  preserve  the  distinction  between  secular  and  spiritual 
legislation.  The  laity  seldom,  perhaps,  gave  their  suffrage 
to  the  canons  of  the  church  ;  but  the  church  was  not  so  scru- 
pulous as  to  trespassing  upon  the  province  of  the  laity. 
Many  provisions  are  found  in  the  canons  of  national  and  even 
provincial  councils  which  relate  to  the  temporal  constitution 
of  the  state.  Thus  one  held  at  Calcluith  (an  unknown  place 
in  England),  in  787,  enacted  that  none  but  legitimate  princes 
should  be  raised  to  the  throne,  and  not  such  as  were  engen- 
dered in  adultery  or  incest.  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that, 
although  this  synod  was  strictly  ecclesiastical,  being  sum 
moned  by  the  pope's  legate,  yet  the  kings  of  Mercia  and 
Northumberland,  with  many  of  their  nobles,  continued  the 
canons  by  their  signature.  As  for  the  councils  held  under 
the  Visigoth  kings  of  Spain  during  the  seventh  century,  it  is 
not  easy  to  determine  whether  they  are  to  lie  considered  as 
ecclesiastical  or  temporal  assemblies.1     No  kingdom  was  so 

1  Marina,  Teoria  de  las  Cortes,  t.  i.  p.  9 
VOL.  I.  —  M.  40 


626  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  STATE.      Chap.  VII.  Pabt  l 

thoroughly  under  the  bondage  of  the  hierarchy  as  Spain.1 
The  first  dynasty  of  France  seem  to  have  kept  their  national 
convention,  called  the  Field  of  March,  more  distinct  from 
merely  ecclesiastical  councils. 

The  bishops  acquired  and  retained  a  great  part  of  their 
ascendency  by  a  very  respectable  instrument  of  power,  intel- 
lectual superiority.  As  they  alone  were  acquainted  with  the 
art  of  writing,  they  were  naturally  entrusted  with  political 
correspondence,  and  with  the  framing  of  the  laws.  As  they 
alone  knew  the  elements  of  a  few  sciences,  the  education  of 
royal  families  devolved  upon  them  as  a  necessary  duty.  In 
the  fall  of  Rome  their  influence  upon  the  barbarians  wore 
down  the  asperities  of  conquest,  and  saved  the  provincials 
half  the  shock  of  that  tremendous  revolution.  As  captive 
Greece  is  said  to  have  subdued  her  Roman  conqueror,  so 
Rome,  in  her  own  turn  of  servitude,  cast  the  fetters  of  a 
moral  captivity  upon  the  fierce  invaders  of  the  north.  Chief- 
ly through  the  exertions  of  the  bishops,  whose  ambition  may 
be  forgiven  for  its  effects,  her  religion,  her  language,  in  part 
even  her  laws,  were  transplanted  into  the  courts  of  Paris 
and  Toledo,  which  became  a  degree  less  barbarous  by  imi- 
tation.2 

Notwithstanding,  however,  the  great  authority  and  privi- 
Supremacy  leges  of  the  church,  it  was  decidedly  subject  to  the 
of  the  state;  SUpreinaCy  of  the  crown,  both  during  the  continu- 
ance of  the  Western  empire  and  after  its  subversion.  The 
emperors  convoked,  regulated,  and  dissolved  universal  coun- 
cils ;  the  kings  of  France  and  Spain  exercised  the  same  right 
over  the  synods  of  their  national  churches.3  The  Ostrogoth 
kings  of  Italy  fixed  by  their  edicts  the  limits  within  which 
matrimony  was  prohibited  on  account  of  consanguinity,  and 
granted  dispensations  from  them.4  Though  the  Roman  em- 
perors left  episcopal  elections  to  the  clergy  and  people  of 
the  diocese,  in  which  they  were  followed  by  the  Ostrogoths 
and  Lombards,  yet  they  often  interfered  so  far  as  to  confirm  a 


1  See  instances  of  the  temporal  power  to  extenuate  the  royal  supremacy,  bu 
of  the  Spanish  bishops  in  Fleury,  Uist.  his  own  work  furnishes  abundant  evi 
Eccles.  t.  viii.  p.368,  397;  t.  ix.  p.68,  &c.  dence  of  it;   especially  1.  vi.  c.  19,  &c 

2  Schmidt,  t.  i.  p.  365.  For   the   ecclesiastical    independence  oi 

3  Encyclopedic,  art.  Concile.  Schmidt,  Spain,  down  to  the  eleventh  century,  se« 
t.  i.  p.  384.  De  Marca,  De  Concordantia  Marina,  Ensayo  sobre  las  Siete  Partidas 
Saeerdotii  et  Imperii,  1.  ii.  o.  9,  11;  et  c.  322,  &c.  ;  and  De  Marca.  1.  vi    c    23. 

'.  iv.  passim.  4  Gianuone,  1.  iii.  c.  6. 

Thi  last  of  these  sometimes  endeavors 


Eccles.  Power.      SUPREMACY   OF  THE  STATE.  627 

decision  or  to  determine  a  contest.  The  king>  of  France 
went  further,  and  seem  to  have  invariably  either  nominated 
the  bishops,  or,  what  was  nearly  tantamount,  recommended 
their  own  candidate  to  the  electors. 

But  the  sovereign  who  maintained  with  the  greatest  vigor 
his  ecclesiastical  supremacy  was  Charlemagne.  especiaUy 
Most  Of  the  capitularies  of  his  reign  relate  to  the  of  charie- 
disciplinc  of  the  church  ;  principally  indeed  taken 
from  the  ancient  canons,  but  not  the  less  receiving  an  addi- 
tional sanction  from  his  authority.1  Some  of  his  regulations, 
which  appear  to  have  been  original,  are  such  as  men  of  high 
church  principles  would,  even  in  modern  times,  deem  infring- 
ments  of  spiritual  independence ;  that  no  legend  of  doubtful 
authority  should  be  read  in  the  churches,  but  only  the  canoni- 
cal books,  and  that  no  saint  should  be  honored  whom  the 
whole  church  did  not  acknowledge.  These  were  not  passed 
in  a  synod  of  bishops,  but  enjoined  by  the  sole  authority  of 
the  emperor,  who  seems  to  have  arrogated  a  legislative 
power  over  the  church  which  he  did  not  possess  in  tem- 
poral affairs.  Many  of  his  other  laws  relating  to  the  eccle- 
siastical constitution  are  enacted  in  a  general  council  of  the 
lay  nobility  as  well  as  of  prelates,  and  are  so  blended  with 
those  of  a  secular  nature,  that  the  two  orders  may  ajjpear  to 
have  equally  consented  to  the  whole.  His  father  Pepin,  in- 
deed, left  a  remarkable  precedent  in  a  council  held  in  744, 
where  the  Nicene  faith  is  declared  to  be  established,  and 
even  a  particular  heresy  condemned,  with  the  consent  of  the 
bishops  and  nobles.  But  whatever  share  we  may  imagine 
the  laitvin  general  to  have  had  in  such  matters,  Charlemagne 
himself  did  not  consider  even  theological  decisions  as  beyond 
his  province ;  and,  in  more  than  one  instance,  manifested  a 
determination  not  to  surrender  his  own  judgment,  even  in 
juestions  of  that  nature,  to  any  ecclesiastical  authority.2 

1  Baluzii  Capitularia,  passim;  Schmidt,  pelted  to  acknowledge  the  supremacy  of 

t.  ii.  p.  239;    Gaillard,   Vie   de    Charle-  a  great  mind.     By  a  vigorous  repression 

magne,  t.  iii.  of  those  secular  propensities  which  were 

-  Charlemagne  had  apparently  devised  displaying  themselves  among  the  superior 

an  ecclesiastical  theory,  which  would  now  clergy,   he  endeavored   to   render    their 

be  called  Erastian,  and  perhaps  not  very  moral    influence    more    effective'.      This, 

short  of  that  of  Henry  VIII.    He  directs  however,  could  not  be  achieved  in  the 

the   clergy  what  to    preach  in  his   osvn  ninth  century;    nor  could  it  have  been 

name   and  uses  the  first  person  in  eccle-  brought  about  by  any  external    power 

siastical  canons.     Yet,  if  we  may  judge  Nor   was   ir    easily    consistent   with    the 

by  the  events,  the  bishops  lost  no  part  of  continual    presence    of    the    bishops    in 

their  permanent  ascendency  in  the  state  national  assemblies,  which    had   become 

thro  -'gh  this  interference,  though  com-  essential   to   the   polity  of  his  age,  and 


628      PRETENSIONS   OF   THE   HIERARCHY     CitAr.  VII.  Pari  L 

This  part  of  Charlemagne's  conduct  is  duly  to  be  taken 
into  the  account  before  we  censure  his  vast  extension  of 
ecclesiastical  privileges.  Nothing  was  more  remote  from  his 
character  than  the  bigotry  of  those  weak  princes  who  have 
suffered  the  clergy  to  reign  under  their  names.  He  acted 
upon  a  systematic  plan  of  government,  conceived  by  his  own 
comprehensive  genius,  but  requiring  too  continual  an  appliea- 
tion  of  similar  talents  for  durable  execution.  It  was  tht 
error  of  a  superior  mind,  zealous  for  religion  and  learning 
to  believe  that  men  dedicated  to  the  functions  of  the  one,  and 
possessing  what  remained  of  the  other,  might,  through  strict 
rules  of  discipline,  enforced  by  the  constant  vigilance  of  the 
sovereign,  become  fit  instruments  to  reform  and  civilize  a 
barbarous  empire.  It  was  the  error  of  a  magnanimous  spirit 
to  judge  too  favorably  of  human  nature,  and  to  presume 
that  great  trusts  wrould  be  fulfilled,  and  great  benefits  re- 
membered. 

It  is  highly  probable,  indeed,  that  an  ambitious  hierarchy 
did  not  endure  without  reluctance  this  imperial  supremacy 
of  Charlemagne,  though  it  was  not  expedient  for  them  to 
Pretensions  resist  a  prince  so  formidable,  and  from  whom  they 
of  the  }iaci  s0  much  to  expect.     But  their  dissatisfaction 

i^thrninth  at  a  scheme  of  government  incompatible  with 
century.  their  own  objects  of  perfect  independence  produced 
a  violent  recoil  under  Louis  the  Debonair,  who  attempted  to 
act  the  censor  of  ecclesiastical  abuses  with  as  much  earnest- 
ness as  his  father,  though  with  very  inferior  qualifications  for 
so  delicate  an  undertaking.  The  bishops  accordingly  were 
among  the  chief  instigators  of  those  numerous  revolts  of  his 
children  which  harrassed  this  emperor.  They  set.  upon  one 
occasion,  the  first  example  of  an  usurpation  which  was  to  be- 
come very  dangerous  to  society  —  the  deposition  of  sover- 
eigns by  ecclesiastical  authority.  Louis,  a  prisoner  in  the 
hands  of  his  enemies,  had  been  intimidated  enough  to  under- 
go a  public  penance ;  and  the  bishops  pretended  that,  accord- 
ing to  a  canon  of  the  church,  he  was  incapable  of  returning 

with  which    he   would   not,  for  several  rebus  secularibus  debeat  inserere,  vel  in 

reasons,  have  wholly  dispensed.     Yet  it  quantum  comes,  vel  alter  laicus,  in  eecle- 

appears,  by  a  remarkable  capitulary  of  siastica  negotia.     But  as  the  laity,  hiin- 

811,  that  lie  had  perceived  the  iticonve-  Belf   excepted,    hail    probably    interfered 

nience  of  allowing  the  secular  and  spir-  very  little  in  church  affairs,  this  oapitu- 

itual  poweri    to  clash  with  each  other:  lary  seems  to  be  restrictive  of  the  pre 

—  Discutiendum  est  atque    intervenien-  lates. 
dum  iu  quantum  se  episcopus  aut  abbas 


Ccci.es.  Power.  IN  THE  NINTH   CENTURY.  629 

afterwards  to  a  secular  life  or  preserving  the  character  of 
sovereignty.1  Circumstances  enabled  him  to  retain  the  em- 
pire in  defiance  of  this  sentence ;  but  the  church  had  tasted 
the  pleasure  of  trampling  upon  crowned  heads,  and  was 
eager  to  repeat  the  experiment.  Under  the  disjointed  and 
feeble  administration  of  his  posterity  in  their  several  king- 
doms, the  bishops  availed  themselves  of  more  than  one  op- 
portunity to  exalt  their  temporal  power.  Those  weak  Car- 
lovingian  princes,  in  their  mutual  animosities,  encouraged 
the  pretensions  of  a  common  enemy.  Thus  Charles  the 
Bald  and  Louis  of  Bavaria,  having  driven  their  brother 
Lothaire  from  his  dominions,  held  an  assembly  of  some 
bishops,  who  adjudged  him  unworthy  to  reign,  and,  after 
exacting  a  promise  from  the  two  allied  brothers  to  govern 
better  than  he  had  done,  permitted  and  commanded  them  to 
divide  his  territories.2  After  concurring  in  this  unprecedent- 
ed encroachment,  Charles  the  Bald  had  little  right  to  com- 
plain when,  some  years  afterwards,  an  assembly  of  bishops 
declared  himself  to  have  forfeited  his  crown,  released  his 
subjects  from  their  allegiance,  and  transferred  his  kingdom  to 
Louis  of  Bavaria.  But,  in  truth,  he  did  not  pretend  to  deny 
the  principle  which  he  had  contributed  to  maintain.  Even 
in  his  own  behalf  he  did  not  appeal  to  the  rights  of  sove- 


i  Habit u   saeculi  se  exueus   habitum  deposed   Wamba;   it  may  have  beeu  a 

pcenitentis   per  impositionem    manuum  voluntary  abdication,  influenced  by  su- 

episcoporum  suscepit;    ut  post  tantam  perstition,  or,  perhaps,   by   disease.     A 

talenique   poenitentiam    nemo   ultra   ad  late  writer  has  taken  a  different  view  of 

militiam   ssecularem    redeat.     Acta   ex-  this  event,  the   deposition    of    Loui-;   at 

auctorationis    Ludovici,  apud   Schmidt,  Compiegue.     It  was  not,  he  thinks,  une 

t.  ii.  p.  68.     There  was  a  sort  of  prece-  hardiesse  sacerdotale,  une  temerite  eccle- 

dent,  though  not,  I  think,  very  apposite,  siastique.  mais  bien  une  klchete  politique. 

for  this  doctrine  of  implied  abdication,  Ce    u'etait    poiut    une    tentative    pour 

in  the  case  of  Wamba  king  of  the  Visi-  elever  l'autorite  religieuse  au-dessn<  .1.' 

?oths  in  Spain,  who.  having  been  clothed  l'autorite  royale  dans  les  affaires  tempo- 

with  a   monastic   dress,  according   to   a  relies;  e'etait,  au  coutrairc,  unabaisse- 

common  superstition,  during  a  dangerous  ment  servile  de   hi    premiere   devant  it 

illness,   was  afterwards   adjudged   by   a  monde.     Fauriel,  Hist,  de  la  Gaule  Me- 

council  incapable  of  resuming  his  crown;  ridionale,  iv.   150.     In   other  words,  the 

to  which  he  voluntarily  submitted.    The  bishops  lent  themselves  to  the  aristocratic 

gtory,  as    told    by   an    original    writer,  faction   which  was    in    rebellion   against 

quoted  in  Baronius  ad  a.d.  681.  is  too  Louis.     Ranke,  as  has  bees  Been  in  an 

obscure    to  warrant   any   positive   infer-  early  note,  thinks  that  thej  acted  out  of 

ence  ;   though  I   think  we   may  justly  revenge  for  his  deviation  from  the  law  of 

suspect  a  fraudulent  contrivance  between  817,  which  established  the  unity  of  tlm 

the  bishops  and  Ervigius,  the  successor  empire.      The   bishops,  in    Int.    had   so 

of  Wamba.    The  latter,  besides  his  mo-  many  secular  and  personal  interests  and 

nastic  attire,  had  received  the  last  sacra-  sympathies,  that  we  cannot  always  judge 

ments;  after  which  he  might  be  deemed  of  their    behavior   upon    general    pirn- 

civillv  dead.     Fleury,  3""-'  Discours  sur  ciples. 

l'Hist.    Ecclesiast.,  "puts   this    case    too        2  Schmidt,   t.   ii.   p.   77.     Velly   t.   ii 

strongly  when  he  tells  ns  that  the  bishops  p.  61 ;  see,  too,  p.  74. 


630    PRETENSIONS   OF  TITE   HIERARCHY.     Chap.  VII.  Paut  L 

reigns,  and  of  the  nation  whom  they  represent  "  No  one," 
says  this  degenerate  grandson  of  Charlemagne,  "ought  to 

have  degraded  me  from  the  throne  to  which  I  was  consecrat- 
ed, until  at  least  T  had  been  heard  and  judged  by  the  bishops, 
through  whose  ministry  I  was  consecrated,  who  are  called 
the  thrones  of  God,  in  which  God  sitteth,  and  by  whom 
he  dispenses  his  judgments;  to  whose  paternal  chastise- 
ment T  was  willing  to  submit,  and  do  still  submit  my- 
self." 1 

These  passages  are  very  remarkable,  and  afford  a  decisive 
proof  that  the  power  obtained  by  national  churches,  through 
the  superstitious  prejudices  then  received,  and  a  train  of 
favorable  circumstances,  was  as  dangerous  to  civil  govern- 
ment as  the  subsequent  usurpations  of  the  Roman  pontiff, 
against  which  Protestant  writers  are  apt  too  exclusively  to 
direct  their  animadversions.  Voltaire,  1  think,  has  remarked 
that  the  ninth  century  was  the  age  of  the  bishops,  as  the 
eleventh  and  twelfth  were  of  the  popes.  It  seemed  as  if 
Europe  was  about  to  pass  under  as  absolute  a  domination 
of  the  hierarchy  as  had  been  exercised  by  the  priesthood  of 
ancient  Egypt  or  the  Druids  of  Gaul.  There  is  extant  a 
remarkable  instrument  recording  the  election  of  Boson  king 
of  Aries,  by  which  the  bishops  alone  appear  to  have  elevated 
him  to  the  throne,  without  any  concurrence  of  the  nobility.2 
But  it  is  inconceivable  that  such  could  have  really  been  the 
case ;  and  if  the  instrument  is  genuine,  we  must  suppose  it 
to  have  been  framed  in  order  to  countenance  future  preten- 
sions. For  the  clergy,  by  their  exclusive  knowledge  of 
Latin,  had  it  in  their  power  to  mould  the  language  of  public 
documents  for  their  own  purposes;  a  circumstance  wrhich 
should  be  cautiously  kept  in  mind  when  we  peruse  instru- 
ments drawn  up  during  the  dark  ages. 

It  was  with  an  equal  defiance  of  notorious  truth  that  the 
bishop  of  Winchester,  presiding  as  papal  legate  at  an  assembly 
of  the  clergy  in  1141,  during  the  civil  war  of  Stephen  and 
Matilda,  asserted  the  right  of  electing  a  king  of  England  to 
appertain  principally  to  that  order;  and,  by  virtue  of  this 
unprecedented  claim,  raised  Matilda  to  the  throne.8    England, 

1  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  217.  que  primo  iu  auxilium  Divinitate,  filiam 

2  Recueil  des  Historiens,  t.  ix.  p.  304.  pacifici    regis,    &c,   in    Anglia    Norman- 

3  VentiJata  est  causa,  says  the  Legate,  niaeque  dominant  eligimus,  et  ei  fidem 
coram  major)  parte  cleri  Angliae,  ad  et  manutenementum  promittinius.  GuL 
cujns  jus   potissimum  ppectat  principem  Maluisb.  p.  188. 

eliger,',  simulque  ordinare.    Invocata  ita 


Eccles   Power.       RISE  OF  THE   PAPAL   POWER.  631 

indeed,  has  been  obsequious,  beyond  most  other  countries,  t« 
the  arrogance  of  her  hierarchy  ;  especially  during  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  period,  when  the  nation  was  sunk  in  ignorance  and 
effeminate  superstition.  Every  one  knows  the  story  of  king 
Edwy  in  some  form  or  other,  though  I  believe  it  impossible 
to  ascertain  the  real  circumstances  of  that  controverted  anec- 
dote.1 But,  upon  the  supposition  least  favorable  to  the  king, 
the  behavior  of  Archbishop  Odo  and  Dunstan  wa-  an  intoler- 
able outrage  of  spiritual  tyranny. 

But  while  the  prelates  of  these  nations,  each  within  hi? 

respective  sphere,  were  prosecuting  their  system 

c  r  ,  i  A       i   -j.  i  Rise  °f  the 

ot  encroachment   upon   the   laity,  a   new   scheme  papal  power. 

was  secretly  forming  within  the  bosom  of  the  itscom- 
church,  to  enthral  both  that  and  the  temporal 
governments  of  the  world  under  an  ecclesiastical  monarch. 
Long  before  the  earliest  epoch  that  can  be  fixed  for  modern 
history,  and,  indeed,  to  speak  fairly,  almost  as  far  back  as 
ecclesiastical  testimonies  can  carry  us,  the  bishops  of  Rome 
had  been  venerated  as  first  in  rank  among  the  rulers  of  the 
church.  The  nature  of  this  primacy  is  doubtless  a  very  con- 
troverted subject.  It  is,  however,  reduced  by  some  moderate 
catholics  to  little  more  than  a  precedency  attached  to  the  see 
of  Rome  in  consequence  of  its  foundation  by  the  chief  of  the 
apostles,  as  well  as  the  dignity  of  the  imperial  city.2  A  sort 
of  general  superintendence  was  admitted  as  an  attribute  of 
this  primacy,  so  that  the  bishops  of  Rome  were  entitled,  and 
indeed  bound,  to  remonstrate,  when  any  error  or  irregularity 
came  to  their  knowledge,  especially  in  the  western  churches, 
a  greater  part  of  which  had  been  planted  by  them,  and  were 
connected,  as  it  were  by  filiation,  with  the  common  capital  of 
the   Roman   empire   and  of  Christendom.4     Various   causes 

1  |Note  II.]  Irenaeus    rather  vaguely,    and  Cyprian 

2  These  foundations  of  the  Roman  pri-  more  positively,  admit,  or  rather  assert, 
macy  are  indicated  by  Valentinian  III.,  the  primacy  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
a  great  favorer  of  that  see,  in  a  novel  of  which  the  latter  seems  even  to  have  con 
the  year  455  :  Cum  igitur  Bedis  aposto-  sidered  as  a  kind  of  centre  of  Catholio 
licae  primatum  B.  Petri  meritum,  qui  unity,  though  he  resisted  every  attempt 
est  priuceps  sacerdotalis  coronae  et  Ro-  of  that  church  to  arrogate  a  controlling 
manae  diguitas  civitatds,  sacrae  etiam  sy-  power. —  See  his  treatise  De  Unitate  Ec- 
nodi  firmavit  auctoritas.     The  last  words  clesiae.     [1818.'  [Note  III.  1 

allude  to  the  sixth  canon  of  the  Nicene  :i  Dupiu.  De  antiqna  Eeclesise  Disci- 
council,  which  establishes  or  recognizes  plina,  p.  306  et  seqq.  :  E&stoire  do  Droit 
the  patriarchal  supremacy,  in  their  re-  public  ecclesiastiqne  Francois,  p.  149- 
Hpective  districts,  of  the  churches  of  The  opinion  of  the  Roman  see's  suprem- 
Rome,  Antioch,  and  Alexandria.  De  aey.  though  apparently  rather  a  vagua 
Marca,  de  Concordantii  Sacerdotii  et  Tin-  and  general  notion,  as  it  still  continues 
oerii,  1.  i.  c.  8.     At  a  much  earlier  period,  in  those  Catholics   who  deny  its  infilli 


032  PATRIARCHATE   OF   ROME.      Chap.  YI1.  Part  I 

had  a  tendency  to  prevent  the  bishops  of  Rome  from  aug- 
menting their  authority  in  the  East,  and  even  to  diminish 
that  which  they  had  occasionally  exercised  ;  the  institution 
of  patriarchs  at  Antiocli,  Alexandria,  and  afterwards  at  Con- 
stantinople, with  extensive  rights  of  jurisdiction ;  the  differ- 
ence of  rituals  and  discipline ;  but,  above  all,  the  many 
disgusts  taken  by  the  Greeks,  which  ultimately  produced  an 
irreparable  schism  between  the  two  churches  in  the  ninth 
century.  But  within  the  pale  of  the  Latin  church  every 
succeeding  age  enhanced  the  power  and  dignity  of  the 
Roman  see.  By  the  constitution  of  the  church,  such  at  least 
as  ii  became  in  the  fourth  century,  its  divisions  being  ar- 
ranged in  conformity  to  those  of  the  empire,  every  province 
ought  to  have  its  metropolitan,  and  every  vicariate  its  ecclesi- 
astical exarch  or  primate.  The  bishop  of  Rome  presided,  in 
the  latter  capacity,  over  the  Roman  vicariate,  comprehending 
southern  Italy,  and  the  three  chief  Mediterranean  islands. 
But  as  it  happened,  none  of  the  ten  provinces  forming  this 
division  had  any  metropolitan  ;  so  that  the  popes  exercised 
all  metropolitical  functions  within  them,  such  as  the  consecra- 
tion of  bishops,  the  convocation  of  synods,  the  ultimate 
decision  of  appeals,  and  many  other  sorts  of  authority. 
These  provinces  are  sometimes  called  the  Roman  patri- 
Patriarchate  archate  ;  the  bishops  of  Rome  having  always  been 
of  Rome.  reckoned  one,  generally  indeed  the  first,  of  the 
patriarchs ;  each  of  whom  was  at  the  head  of  all  the  metro- 
politans within  his  limits,  but  without  exercising  those 
privileges  which  by  the  ecclesiastical  constitution  appertained 
to  the  latter.  Though  the  Roman  patriarchate,  properly  so 
called,  was  comparatively  very  small  in  extent,  it  gave  its 
chief,  for  the  reason  mentioned,  advantages  in  point  of 
authority  which  the  others  did  not  possess.1 

I  may  perhaps  appear  to  have  noticed  circumstances  inter 
esting  only  to  ecclesiastical  scholars.     But  it  is  important  to 
apprehend     this    distinction    of    the    patriarchate    from    the 
primacy  of  Rome,  becau-e  it  was  by  extending  the  bounda- 

bility,  seems  to  have  prevailed  very  much  ii.  e.  8;  1.  iii  c.  6.;  De  Marca,  1.  i.  c.  7  et 

in    the   fourth   century.     Fleury  brings  alibi.     There  is  some  disagreement  among 

remarkable  proofs  of  this  from  the  writ-  these  writers  as  to  the  extent  of  the  Ko- 

ings   of   Socrates,    Sozomen,  Ammianus  man  patriarchate,  which    some  suppose 

Mircellinus,  and  Optatus.     Hist.  Eccles.  to   have  even  at  first  comprehended  all 

t.  in.  p.  282,  320,  449;   t.  iv.  p.  227.  the    western  churches,  though   they  ad- 

on1?'11'  De  A,ltifJui  Bodes .  Diseiplinu,  niit   that,  in  a  more   particular  sense,  it 

p.  89,  &c.  ;  Giannoue,  1st.  di  Napoli,  1.  was  confined  to  the  vicariate  of  Rome 


fcCCLES.  Power.       PATRIARCHATE   OF   ROME  633 

vies  of  the  former,  and  by  applying  the  maxims  of  her 
administration  in  the  south  of  Italy  to  all  the  western 
churches,  that  she  accomplished  the  first  object  of  her  scheme 
of  usurpation,  in  subverting  the  provincial  system  of  govern- 
ment under  the  metropolitans.  Their  first  encroachment  of 
this  kind  was  in  the  province  of  Illyricum,  which  they 
annexed  in  a  manner  to  their  own  patriarchate,  by  not 
permitting  any  bishops  to  be  consecrated  without  their  con- 
sent.1  This  was  before  the  end  of  the  fourth  century. 
Their  subsequent  advances  were,  however,  very  gradual. 
About  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  Ave  find  them  confirm- 
ing the  elections  of  archbishops  of  Milan.2  They  came  by 
de°rees  to  exercise,  though  not  always  successfully,  and 
seldom  without  opposition,  an  appellant  jurisdiction  over  the 
causes  of  bishops  deposed  or  censured  in  provincial  synods. 
This,  indeed,  had  been  granted,  if  we  believe  the  fact,  by  the 
canons  of  a  very  early  council,  that  of  Sardica,  in  347,  so  far 
as  to  permit  the  pope  to  order  a  revision  of  the  process,  but 
not  to  annul  the  sentence.3  Valentinian  III.,  influenced  by 
Leo  the  Great,  one  of  the  most  ambitious  of  pontiffs,  had 
gone  a  great  deal  further,  and  established  almost  an  absolute 
judicial  supremacy  in  the  Holy  See.4     But  the  metropolitans 

1  Dupin,  p.  66 ;  Fleury,  Hist.  Eccles.  sedi,  juxta  canones,  debetur  summa  ju- 
t.  v.  p.  373.  The  ecclesiastical  province  dicii  totius.  As  the  oak  is  in  the  acorn, 
of  Illyricnm  included  Macedonia.  Siri-  so  did  these  maxims  contain  the  system 
cius,  the  author  of  this  encroachment,  of  Bellarmin.  De  Marca,  1.  i.  c.  10 ;  and 
seems   to    hare    been    one   of   the  first  1.  vii.  c.  12.     Dupin. 

usurpers.  In  a  letter  to  the  Spanish  4  Some  bishops  belonging  to  the  pro- 
bishops  (a.d.  375)  he  exalts  his  own  au-  vince  of  Hilary,  metropolitan  of  Arks, 
thority  very  high.     De  Marca,  1.  i.  c   8.  appealed  from  his  sentence  to  Leo,  who 

2  St.  Marc,  t.  i.  p.  139,  153.  not  only   entertained  their  appeal,  but 

3  Dupin,  p.  109;  De  Marca,  1.  vi.  c.  14.  presumed  to  depose  Hilary.  This  as- 
These  canons  have  been  questioned,  and  sumption  of  power  would  have  had  little 
Dupin  does  not  seem  to  lay  much  stress  effect,  if  it  had  not  been  seconded  by  the 
( n  their  authority,  though  I  do  not  per-  emperor  in  very  unguarded  language  ; 
ceive  that  either  he,  or  Fleury  (Hist,  hoc  perenni  sanctione  decernimus,  ne 
Eccles.  t.  iii.  p.  372),  doubts  their  genu-  quid  tarn  episcopis  Gallicanis,  quam  ali- 
ineness.  Sardica  was  a  city  of  Illyricum,  arum  provinciarum,  contra  consuetu- 
which  the  translator  of  Mosheim  has  con-  dinem  veterem  liceat  sine  auctoritata 
founded  with  Sardes.  viri  venerabilis  papae  urbis  apterna?  ten- 
Consultations     or   references    to    the  tare ;  sed  illis  omnibusque  pro  lege  sit, 

bishop  of  Rome,  in  difficult  cases  of  faith  quidquid  sanxit  vel  sanxerit  apostolicae 

or  discipline,  had  been  common  in  early  sedis  auctoritas.     De  Marca,  De  Conoor- 

ages,  and  were  even  made  by  provincial  dantia   Sacerdotii  et  Imperii,  1.   i.  c.  8. 

aud  national  councils.     But  these  were  .  The  same    emperor    enacted    that    any 

also  made  to  other  bishops  emiment  for  bishop  who  refused  to  attend  the  tribunal 

personal  merit,  or  the  dignity  of  their  of  the  pope  when  summoned  should  be 

sees.      The   popes   endeavored   to   claim  compelled  by   the  governor  of  1  is  prov- 

this  as  a  matter  of  right.     Innocent  I.  ince;    ut  quisquis  episcoporum   ad  ju 

asserts    (a.d.    402)    that   he    was    to    be  dicium  Komani  episcopi  evocatus  venira 

consulfed,  quoties  fidei  ratio  ventilatur;  neglexerit,  per  moderatorem  ejusdem  prc- 

and  Gelasius  (a.d.  492),  quantum  ad  re-  vinciae  adesse  cogatur.     M.   1.  vii_.  c.  13; 

ligionera   pertinet,   non    nisi    apostolicae  Dupin.  De  Ant.  Discipl.  p.  29  et  171. 


034  GREGORY   T.  CiiAr.  VII.  Part  t. 

were  not  inclined  (o  surrender  their  prerogatives  ;  and,  upon 
the  whole,  the  papal  authority  had  made  no  decisive  progress 
in  France,  or  perhaps  anywhere  beyond  Italy,  till  the  pon- 
tificate of  Gregory  I. 

This  celebrated  person   was   not   distinguished  by  learning, 
Gregory  I       which  he  affected  to  depreciate,  nor  by  his  literary 
a°d.  performances,  which  the    best    critics  consider  as 

below  mediocrity,  but  by  qualities  more  necessary 
for  his  purpose,  intrepid  ambition  and  unceasing  activity. 
He  maintained  a  perpetual  correspondence  with  the  emperors 
and  their  ministers,  with  the  sovereigns  of  the  western  kin<_r- 
doms,  with  all  the  hierarchy  of  the  Catholic  church  ;  employ- 
ing, as  occasion  dictated,  the  language  of  devotion,  arrogance, 
or  adulation.1  Claims  hitherto  disputed,  or  half  preferred, 
assumed  under  his  hands  a  more  definite  form  ;  and  nations 
too  ignorant  to  compare  precedents  or  discriminate  principles 
yielded  to  assertions  confidently  made  by  the  authority  which 
they  most  respected.  Gregory  dwelt  more  than  his  prede- 
cessors upon  the  power  of  the  keys,  exclusively,  or  at  least 
principally,  committed  to  St.  Peter,  which  had  been  supposed 
in  earlier  times,  as  it  is  now  by  the  Gallican  Catholics,  to  be 
inherent  in  the  general  body  of  bishops,  joint  sharers  o'"  one 
indivisible  episcopacy.  And  thus  the  patriarchal  rights,  be- 
ing manifestly  of  mere  ecclesiastical  institution,  were  artfully 
confounded,  or  as  it  were  merged,  in  the  more  paramount 
supremacy  of  the  papal  chair.  From  the  time  of  Gregory 
the  popes  appear  in  a  great  measure  to  have  thrown  away 
that  scaffolding,  and  relied  in  preference  on  the  pious  venera- 
tion of  the  people,  and  on  the  opportunities  which  might 
occur  for  enforcing  their  dominion  with  the  pretence  of  divine 
authority.2 

1  The   flattering    style   in   which    this  Rome,  which  had  been  long  in  suspense, 

pontiff  addressed  Brunehaut and  Phocas,  Stephen,  a  Spanish  bishop,  baying  been 

the  most  flagitious  monsters  of  his  time,  deposed,    appealed    to    Koine.      Gregory 

Is  mentioned  in  all  civil  and  ecclesiastical  sent  a  legate  to  Spain,  with  full  powers 

histories.     Fleury    quotes  a   remarkable  to  confirm  or  rescind  the  sentence.     He 

letter  to  the  patriarchs  of  Antioch  and  says    in   his   letter  on    this   occasion,    a 

Alexandria  wherein    he    says   that    St.  sede    apostolica,    qure   omnium    ecclesi- 

Peter  has  one  see,  divided  into   three,  -arum  caput  est,  causa  hse     audienda  ao 

Home,  Antioch,  and  Alexandria;  stoop-  dirimenda  fuerat.     De  Marca,  1.  vii.  c.  18. 

ing  to  this  absurdity,  and  inconsistence  Iu   writing  to  the  bishops  of  France  he 

with  his  real  system,  in  order  to  concil-  enjoins  them  to  obey  Virgiliua  bishop  of 

iat<-    their  alliance  against  his  more  hn-  Aries,  whom  he  has  appointed  his  legate 

aiediate  rival,  the  patriarch  of  Constau-  in  France,  secundum   antiquam   consue- 

tinople.    Hist.  Eoeles.  t.  viii.  p.  124.  tudinem  ;    so    that,  if  any    contention 

*  Gregory   seems   to   have    established  should  arise  in  the  church,  he  may  ap 

the  appellant  jurisdiction  of  the   see  of  pease  it  by  his  authority,  as  vicegerent 


KCCLES.    POWKR. 


GREGORY   I. 


It  cannot,  I  think,  be  said  that  any  material  acquisition?  of 
ecclesiastical  power  were  obtained  by  the  successors  of  Greg* 
ory  for  nearly  one  hundred  and  fifty  year-.1  As  none  of 
them  possessed  vigor  and  reputation  equal  to  his  own,  it 
might  even  appear  that  the  papal  influence  was  retrograde. 


of  the  apostolic  see ;  auctoritatis  suae 
vigore,  vieibus  neinpe  apostolicae  sedis 
functus,  discrete  moderatioue  eompescat. 
Gregorii  Opera,  t.  ii.  p.  783  (edit.  Bene- 
dict.);  Dupiu,  p.  34;  Pasquier,  Recher- 
ches  de  la  France,  1.  iii.  c.  9. 

1  I  observe   that  some  modern  publi- 
cations   annex  considerable   importance 
to  a  supposed  concession  of  the  title  of 
Universal  Bishop,  made  by  the  emperor 
Phocas  in  606  to  Boniface  III.,  and  even 
appear  to  date  the  papal  supremacy  from 
this  epoch.    Those  who  have  imbibed  this 
notion   may   probably  have   been  misled 
by  a  loose  expression  in  Mosheiims  Eccle- 
siastical  History,  vol.  ii.  p.   169  ;  though 
the  general  tenor  of  that  passage  by  no 
means  gives  countenance    to  their  opin- 
ion.    But  there  are  several  strong  objec- 
tions to  our  considering  this  as  a  leading 
fact,  much  less  as  marking  an  era  in  the 
history  of  the  papacy.     1.  Its  truth.  as 
commonly    stated,   appears    more    than 
questionable.     The  Roman  pontiffs,  Greg- 
ory I.   and  Boniface  III.,  had  been  ve- 
hemently  opposing  the    assumption  of 
this  title  by  the  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, not  as  due  to  themselves,  but  as 
one  to  which  no  bishop  could  legitimately 
pretend.     There  would  be  something  al- 
most ridiculous  in  the  emperor's  imme- 
diately   conferring    an     appellation     on 
themselves    which   they    had   just    dis- 
claimed;     and    though     this    objection 
would    not   stand   against  evidence,   yet 
when  we  find  no  better  authority  quoted 
for  the  fact   than  Baronius,   who  is  no 
authority  at  all.  it  retains    considerable 
weight.     And  indeed    the  want  of  early 
testimony   is   so    decisive    an    objection 
to  any  alleged  historical  fact,  that,  but 
for   the  strange   prepossessions   of  some 
men.    one    might    rest    the    case    here, 
b'leury  takes  no  notice  of  this  part  of  the 
story,  fc'iough    he   tells  us  that   Phocas 
compelled    the    patriarch   of   Constanti- 
nople to  resign  his  title.     2.  But  if  the 
strongest  proof  could  be  advanced  for 
the  authenticity  of  this  circumstance,  we 
might   well   deny    its    importance.     The 
concession  of  Phocas  could  have  been  of 
uo   validity  in   Lombardy,  France,   and 
other  western  countries,  where  neverthe- 
less   the    papal   supremacy    was    incom- 
parably   more   established    than    in    the 
East.      3.    F]veu   within    the    empire   it 
sould  have  had  no  efficacy  after  the  vio- 
lent death  of  that  usurper, which  followed 


soon  afterwards.      4.    The  title  of  Uni- 
versal   Bishop   is   not   very   intelligible; 
but,  whatever  it  meant,  the  patriarchs  of 
Constantinople  had  borne  it  before,  and 
contiuued    to    bear   it    ever    afterwards. 
(Dupin,  De  Antiqua  Discipline,  p.  329.) 
5-  The  preceding  popes.  Pelagius  II.  and 
Gregory  I.  had  constantly  disclaimed  the 
appellation,  though  it  had  been  adopted 
by  some   towards  Leo  the  Great  iu  the 
council   of   Chalcedon    (Fleury,    t.    viii. 
p.  95);  nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been 
retained   by  the   successors  of  Boniface. 
It  is  even  laid  down  in  the  decretum  of 
Gratian  that  the  pope  is  not  styled  uni- 
versal :  nee  etiam  Romanus  pontifex  uni- 
versalis  appellatur  (p.  303.  edit.    1591), 
though  some  refer  its  assumption  to  the 
ninth  centurj  .  Nouveau  Traite  de  Diplo- 
matique, t.  v.  p.  93.     In  tact  it  has  never 
been   an   usual   title.     6.    The  popes  had 
unquestionably   exercised   a    species    of 
supremacy  for  more  than   two  centuries 
before  this  time,  which  had  lately  x-eached 
a  high  point  of  authority  under  Gregory  I. 
The  rescript  of  Valentiuian  III.  in  455, 
quoted  in  a  former  note,  would  certainly 
be  more  to  the  purpose  than  the  letter 
of  Phocas.     7.   Lastly,  there  are  no  sen- 
sible marks  of  this  supremacy  making  a 
more  rapid  progress  for  a  century  and  a 
half  after    the    pretended    grant  of   that 
emperor.     [1818.]     The  earliest  mention 
of  this  transaction  that  I  have  found,  and 
one  which  puts  an  end  to  the  pretended 
concession  of  such  a  title  as  Universal 
Bishop,  is  in  a  brief  general  chronology, 
by    Bede,   entitled   '  De   Temporum    Ra- 
tioned    He  only  says  of  Phocas, —  Hie, 
rogante   papa   Bonifacio,   statuit    sedem 
Romance  et   apostolicae    ecclesiae    caput 
esse  omnium   ecclesiarum,  quia  ecclesia 
Constantinopolit.ini  primam  se  omnium 
ecclesiarum  scribebat.    Bedae  Opera,  curl 
Giles,  vol.  vi.  p.  323.     This  was  probably 
the   exact  truth ;    and    the    subsequent 
additions   were    made    by    some    zealous 
partisans  of  Koine,  to  be   seized  hold  of 
in  a  later  age.  and  turned  against  her  by 
some    of    her    equally    zealous    enemies. 
The  distinction  generally   made  is.  that 
the  pope  is  "  universalis   ecclesue   epis- 
copus,'*  but  not  '•episcopus  universalis;' 
that  is,  he  has  no  immediate  jurisdiction 
in  the  dioceses  of  other  bishops,  though 
he  can  correct  them  for  the   undue  exer- 
cise 'd'  their  own.     The   Ultramontnnes 
of  course  ko  further 


636  ST.   BONIFACE.  Chap.  VIi    Part  I 

But  in  effect  the  principles  which  supported  it  were  taking 
deeper  root,  and  acquiring  strength  by  occasional  though  not 
very  frequent  exercise.  Appeals  to  the  pope  were  some- 
times made  by  prelates  dissatisfied  with  a  local  sentence;  but 
his  judgment  of  reversal  was  not  always  executed,  as  we  per- 
ceive by  the  instance  of  bishop  Wilfrid.1  National  councils 
were  still  convoked  by  princes,  and  canons  enacted  under 
their  authority  by  the  bishops  who  attended.  Though  the 
fhurch  of  Lombardy  was  under  great  subjection  during  this 
period,  yet  those  of  France,  and  even  of  England,  planted  as 
the  latter  had  been  by  Gregory,  continued  to  preserve  a 
tolerable  measure  of  independence.2  The  first  striking  in- 
fringement of  this  was  made  through  the  influence  of  an 
Englishman,  Winfrid,  better  known  as  St.  Boniface,  the 
apostle  of  Germany.  Having  undertaken  the 
conversion  of  Thuringia,  and  other  still  heathen 
countries,  he  applied  to  the  pope  for  a  commission,  and  was 
consecrated  bishop  without  any  determinate  see.  Upon  this 
occasion  he  took  an  oath  of  obedience,  and  became  ever  af- 
terwards a  zealous  upholder  of  the  apostolical  chair.  His 
success  in  the  conversion  of  Germany  was  great,  his  reputa- 
tion eminent,  which  enabled  him  to  effect  a  material  revolu- 
tion in  ecclesiastical  government.  Pelagius  II.  had,  about 
580,  sent  a  pallium,  or  vest  peculiar  to  metropolitans,  to  the 
bishop  of  Aries,  perpetual  vicar  of  the  Roman  see  in  Gaul.3 

i  I  refer  to  the  English  historians  for  Saxon  church.     Nor  do  I  perceive  any 

the    history  of  Wilfrid,   which    neither  improhahility  in    this,  considering   that 

Altogether  supports,  nor  much  impeaches,  the  church   had  been    founded  by   A.U- 

the   independency   of   our    Anglo-Saxon  gustin,  and  restored  by  Theodore,  both 

church  in  700 ;  a  matter  hardly  worth  so  under  the  authority  of  the  Roman  see. 

much  contention  as  Usher  and  Stilling-  This  intrinsic  presumption  is  worth  more 

fleet  seem  to  have  thought.      The  con-  than  the  testimony  of  Eddius.     But  we 

secration  of  Theodore   by  pope  Vitalian  see  by  the  rest  of  Wilfrid's  history  that 

in  668  is  a  stronger  fact,  and  cannot  be  it  was  not  easy  to  put  the  sentence  of 

got  over  by  those  injudicious  protestants  Rome  in  execution.     The  plain  facts  are. 

who  take  the  bull  by   the   horns.     The  that,  having  gone  to  Rome  claiming  the 

history  of  Wilfrid  has  been  lately  rut  in  see  of  York,  and  having  had  his  claim 

a  light  as  favorable  as  possible  to  him-  recognized  by    the  pope,   he  ended    his 

self  and  to  the  authority  of  Rome  Iiy  Dr.  days  as  bishop  of  Hexham. 
Lingard.     We   have  for   this  to  rely  on         '-"  Schmidt,  t.  i.  p.  386,  394. 
Eddius  (published  in  Gale's  Scriptores),        a  Ut  ad  instar    suum,    in   Galliaruui 

a  panegyrist  in  the  usual  style  of  legend-  partibus  primi  sacerdotis  locum  obtiueat, 

ary  biography.  —  a  style  which  has,  on  et  quidquid  ad  gubemationem  vel  dis- 

me  at  lejst,  the  effect  of  producing  utter  pensationem   ecclesiastic!    status    geren 

distrust.     Mendacity  is  the  badge  of  all  dum  est,  servatis  patrum  regulis,  et  sedis 

the  tribe.      Bede  is   more    respectable;  apostolicae  constitutes,  faciat.     Praitorea, 

but  in  this  case  we  do  not  learn  much  pallium  illi  concedit,  &c.     Dupin,  p.  31. 

from  him.     It  seems  impossible  to  deny  Gregory    I.    confirmed   this  vicariate    to 

that,  if   Eddius  is  a  trustworthy  histo-  Virgilius  bishop  of  Aries,  and  gave  him 

rian,  Dr.  Lingard  has  made  out  his  case;  the    power    of   convoking    syuods.      De 

and  that  we  must  own  appeals  to  Rome  Marea,  1.  vi.  c.  7. 
to  have  been  recognized   iu    the  Anglo- 


Ecclks.  Power.        SYNOD   OF   FRANKFORT.  637 

Gregory  I.  had  made  a  similar  present  to  other  metropoli- 
tans. But  it  was  never  supposed  that  they  were  obliged  to 
wait  for  this  favor  before  they  received  consecration,  intil  a 
synod  of  the  French  and  German  bishops,  held  at  synod  of 
Frankfort  in  742,  by  Boniface,  as  legate  of  pope  Frankfort. 
Zachary.  It  was  here  enacted  that,  as  a  token  of  their  wil- 
ling subjection  to  the  see  of  Rome,  all  metropolitans  should 
request  the  pallium  at  the  hands  of  the  pope,  and  obey  hi?i 
lawful  command-.1  This  was  construed  by  the  popes  to 
mean  a  promise  of  obedience  before  receiving  the  pall,  which 
was  changed  in  after  times  by  Gregory  VII.  into  an  oath  of 
fealty.2 

This  council  of  Frankfort  claims  a  leading  place  as  an 
epoch  in  the  history  of  the  papacy.  Several  events  ensued, 
chiefly  of  a  political  nature,  which  rapidly  elevated  that 
usurpation  almost  to  its  greatest  height.  Subjects  of  the 
throne  of  Constantinople,  the  popes  had  not  as  yet  interfered, 
unless  by  mere  admonition,  with  the  temporal  magistrate. 
The  first  instance  wherein  the  civil  duties  of  a  nation  and 
the  rights  of  a  crown  appear  to  have  been  submitted  to  his 
decision  was  in  that  famous  reference  as  to  the  deposition  of 
Childeric.  It  is  impossible  to  consider  this  in  any  other  light 
than  as  a  point  of  casuistry  laid  before  the  first  religious 
judge  in  the  church.  Certainly,  the  Franks  who  raised  the 
king  of  their  choice  upon  their  shields  never  dreamed  that  a 
foreign  priest  had  conferred  upon  him  the  right  of  governing. 
Yet  it  was  easy  for  succeeding  advocates  of  Rome  to  construe 
this  transaction  very  favorably  for  its  usurpation  over  the 
thrones  of  the  earth.3 

1  Decrevimus,  says  Boniface,  iu  nostro  Constantinople  in  872,   this  prerogative 

synodali   conventu,   et    confessi    sumus  of  sending  the  pallium  to  metropolitans 

fidem  satholicam,  et  unitatem  et  subjec-  was  not  only  confirmed  to  the  pope,  but 

tioutLi  Romanae  eccleshe  fine  tenus  ser-  extended   to   the   other  patriarchs,  whc 

vare,  S.  Petro  et  vicario  ejus  velle  sub-  had  every  disposition  to  become  as  great 

jici,   metropolitauos  pallia  ab   ilia  sede  usurpers  as  their  more  fortunate  elisr 

quaerere,  et,  per  omnia,  prsecepta  S.  Pe-  brother. 

tri  canonice  sequi.     De  Marca,  1.  vi.  c.  7  ;  -  Be  Marca,  ubi  supra.     Schmidt,  t.  ii. 

Schmidt,  t    i.    p.   424,   438.   44G.      This  p.   2tj2.      According  to   the    latter,    this 

writer    justly    remarks'     the    obligation  oath  of  fidelity  was  exacted  in  the  ninth 

which  Rome   had  to  St.   Boniface,   who  century;  which  is  very  probable,  since 

anticipated  the  system  of  Isidore.     We  Gregory  VII.  himself  did  but  fill  up  the 

bxve  a  letter  from  him  to   the   English  sketch  which  Nicholas  I.  and  Johu  VIII. 

clergy,  with  a  copy  of  canons  passed  in  had  delineated.     I  have  since  found  this 

one  of  his  synods,  for  the  exaltation  of  confirmed  by  Gratian,  p.  305? 

the  apostolic  see.  but  the  church  of  Eng-  8  Eginhard  says  that  Pepin  was  made 

land  was  not  then  inclined  to  acknowl-  king  per  auctoritatem  Etomani  pontificis; 

edge    so    great  a  supremacy   in    Rome,  an  ambiguous  word,  which  may  rise  to 

Collier's  Eccles.  History,  p.  128.  command,  or  sink  to  advice,  according  t» 

In  the  eighth  general  council,  that  of  the  disposition  of  the  interpreter. 


C38  FALSE  DECRETALS.       Chap.  VII.  Pahi  I 

I  shall  but  just  glance  at  the  subsequent  political  revolu- 
tions of  that  period;  the  invasion  of  Italy  by  Pepin,  his 
donation  of  the  exarchate  to  the  Holy  See,  the  conquest  of 
Lombardy  by  Charlemagne,  the  patriarchate  of  Rome  eon- 
ferred  upon  both  these  princes,  and  the  revival  of  the  West- 
ern empire  in  the  person  of  the  latter.  These  events  had  a 
natural  tendency  to  exalt  the  papal  supremacy,  which  it  is 
needless  to  indicate.  But  a  circumstance  of  a  very  different 
nature  contributed  to  this  in  a  still  greater  degree.  About 
the  conclusion  of  the  eighth  century  there  appeared,  under 
the  name  of  one  Isidore,  an  unknown  person,  a  collection  of 
False  ecclesiastical  canons,  now  commonly  denominated 

Decretals.  t}ie  Faise  Decretals.1  These  purported  to  be  re- 
scripts or  decrees  of  the  early  bishops  of  Rome ;  and  their 
effect  was  to  diminish  the  authority  of  metropolitans  over 
their  suffragans,  by  establishing  an  appellant  jurisdiction  of 
the  Roman  See  in  all  causes,  and  by  forbidding  national 
councils  to  be  holden  without  its  consent.  Every  bishop, 
according  to  the  decretals  of  Isidore,  was  amenable  only  to 
the  immediate  tribunal  of  the  pope ;  by  which  one  of  the 
most  ancient  rights  of  the  provincial  synod  was  abrogated. 
Every  accused  person  might  not  only  appeal  from  an  inferior 
sentence,  but  remove  an  unfinished  process  before  the  supreme 
pontiff.  And  the  latter,  instead  of  directing  a  revision  of  the 
proceedings  by  the  original  judges,  might  annul  them  by  his 
own  authority ;  a  strain  of  jurisdiction  beyond  the  canons  of 
Sardica,  but  certainly  warranted  by  the  more  recent  practice 
of  Rome.  New  sees  were  not  to  be  erected,  nor  bishops 
translated  from  one  see  to  another,  nor  their  resignations 
accepted,  without  the  sanction  of  the  pope.  They  were  still 
indeed  to  be  consecrated  by  the  metropolitan,  but  in  the  pope's 
name.  It  has  been  plausibly  suspected  that  these  decretals 
were  forged  by  some  bishop,  in  jealousy  or  resentment ;  and 

'  The  era  of  the  False  Decretals   has  this   collection   of  Adrian ;    but   I  have 

not  been  precisely  fixed  ;  they  have  sel-  not  observed   the  same   opinion  in    any 

doin   been   supposed,   however,  to   have  other  writer.     The  right  of  appeal  from 

appeared  much   before  800.     But  there  a  sentence  of  the  metropolitan  deposing 

is   a  genuine   collection  of  canons  pub-  a  bishop   to   the  Holy  See  is   positively 

iished  by  Adrian  I.  in  785,  which  contain  recognized  in  the  Capitularies  of  Louis 

nearly  the  same  principles,  and  many  of  the  Debonair  (Baluze,  p.  1000)  ;   the  three 

which  are  copied  by  Isidore,  as  well  as  last   books   of  which,    according   to  the 

Charlemagne    in    his   Capitularies.      De  collection   of  Ansegisus,  are  said   to   ba 

RAarca,  1.  vii.  c.  20  ;  Qiannone,  1.  v.  c.  6;  apostolicS  auctoritate  roborata,  quia  hid 

Dupin,  De  Antiqua   Discipline,    p.    133.  cudendis  maxime  apostolica  interfuit  le- 

Fleury,  Hist.  Eccles.  t.  ix    p.  500,  seems  (ratio,     p.  1132. 
to  consider  the  decretals  as  older  than 


Eccles.  Power.  PAPAL  ENCROACHMENTS.  039 

their  general  reception  may  at  least  be  partly  ascribed  to 
such  sentiments.  The  archbishops  were  exceedingly  power- 
ful, and  might  often  abuse  their  superiority  over  interior 
prelates ;  but  the  whole  episcopal  aristocracy  had  abundant 
reason  to  lament  their  acquiescence  in  a  system  of  which  the 
metropolitans  were  but  the  earliest  victims.  Upon  these  spu- 
rious decretals  was  built  the  great  fabric  of  papal  supremacy 
over  the  different  national  churches ;  a  fabric  which  has  stood 
after  its  foundation  crumbled  beneath  it ;  for  no  one  has  pre- 
tended to  deny,  for  the  last  two  centuries,  that  the  impostura 
is  too  palpable  for  any  but  the  most  ignorant  ages  to  credit.1 

The  Gallican  church  made  for  some  time  a  spirited  though 
unavailing  struggle  against  thi?  rising  despotism. 

c  do  o  o  i  Panal  en- 

Gregory  IV.,  having  come  into  France  to  abet  the  croachmenta 
children  of  Louis  the  Debonair  in  their  rebellion,  °n  the , 
and  threatened  to  excommunicate  the  bishops  who 
adhered  to  the  emperor,  was  repelled  with  indignation  by 
those  prelates.     "  If  he  comes  here  to  excommunicate,"  said 
they,  "  he   shall   depart   hence   excommunicated." 2     In    the 
subsequent  reign  of  Charles   the  Bald   a  bold  defender  of 
ecclesiastical  independence  was  found  in  Hincmar  archbishop 
of    Rheims,   the   most  distinguished   statesman   of   his    age. 
Appeals  to  the  pope  even  by  ordinary  clerks  had  become 
common,  and  the  provincial  councils,   hitherto  the  supreme 
spiritual  tribunal,  as  well  as  legislature,  were  falling  rapidly 
into  decay.     The  frame  of  church  government,  which  had 
lasted  from  the  third  or  fourth  century,  was  nearly  dissolved ; 
a  refractory  bishop  was  sure  to  invoke  the  supreme  court  of 
appeal,  and  generally  met  there  with  a  more  favorable  judi- 
cature.    Hincmar,  a  man  equal  in  ambition,  and  almost  in 
public  estimation,  to  any  pontiff,  sometimes  came  off  sue 
(ully  in  his  contentions  with  Rome.3     But  time  is  fatal  to  the 

i  I  have  not  seen  any  account  of  the  the  papal  court,  without  sacrificing  ai 

lecretals   so  clear  and  judicious   as  in  together  the  Gallican    church   and   the 

Schmidt's  History  of  Germany,  t.  ii.  p.  crown. 

•>49.  Indeed  all  the  ecclesiastical  part  2  De  Marca,  1.  iv.  c.  11  ;  Velly,  &c. 
of  that  work  is  executed  in  a  very  supe-  3  De  Marca  1.  iv.  c.  68,  &c. ;  1  vi.  c.  14, 
rior  manner.  See  also  De  Marca,  1.  iii.  28;  1.  vii.  c.  21.  Dupin,  p.  133,  &c. 
o.  5;  1.  vii.  c.  20.  The  latter  writer,  Hist,  du  Droit  Eccles.  Francois,  p.  188, 
from  whom  I  have  derived  much  iufor-  224.  Velly,  &c.  Hincmar  however  was 
mation,  is  by  no  means  a  strenuous  ad-  not  consistent;  for,  having  obtained  tha 
versary  of  ultramontane  pretensions.  In  see  of  Rheims  in  an  equivocal  manner, 
fact,  it  was  his  object  to  please  both  in  he  had  applied  for  confirmation  at  Koine, 
[•'ranee  and  at  Koine,  to  become  both  an  and  in  other  respects  impaired  the  Gal- 
archbishop  and  a  car. linal.  lie  failed  lican  rights.  Pasquier,  Kecherches  de  la 
nevertheless  of  the  latter  hope  :  it  being  France,  1.  iii.  c.  12. 
mpossible  at  that  time  (1650)  to  Balds  5 


G40 


PAPAL  ENCROACHMENTS.      Chap.  VII.  Part  1 


unanimity  of  coalitions;  the  French  bishops  were  accessible 
to  superstitious  prejudice,  to  corrupt  influence,  to  mutual 
jealousy.  Above  all,  they  were  conscious  that  a  persuasion 
of  the  pope's  omnipotence  had  taken  hold  of  the  laity. 
Though  they  complained  loudly,  and  invoked,  like  patriots 
of  a  dying  stale,  names  and  principles  of  a  freedom  that  was 
no  more,  they  submitted  almost  in  every  instance  to  the  con- 
tinual usurpations  of  the  Holy  See.  One  of  those  which 
most  annoyed  their  aristocracy  was  the  concession  to  monas- 
teries of  exemption  from  episcopal  authority.  Tlie.-e  had 
been  very  uncommon  till  about  the  eighth  century,  after 
which  they  were  studiously  multiplied.1  It  was  naturally  a 
favorite  object  with  the  abbots ;  and  sovereigns,  in  those  ages 
of  blind  veneration  for  monastic  establishments,  were  plea«ed 
to  see  their  own  foundations  rendered,  as  it  would  seem,  more 
respectable  by  privileges  of  independence.  The  popes  had 
a  closer  interest  in  granting  exemptions,  which  attached  to 
them  the  regular  clergy,  and  lowered  the  dignity  of  the 
bishops.     Tn  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  whole  orders 


1  The  earliest  instance  of  a  papal  ex- 
emption is  in  455,  which  indeed  is  a 
respectable  antiquity.  Others  scarcely 
occur  till  the  pontificate  of  Zachary  in 
the  middle  of  the  eighth  century,  who 
granted  an  exemption  to  Monte  Casino, 
Ita  ut  nullius  juri  subjaceat,  nisi  solius 
Komani  pontificis.  See  this  discussed 
in  Giannone,  1.  v.  c.  6.  Precedents  for 
the  exemption  of  monasteries  from  epis- 
copal jurisdiction  occur  in  Marculfus's 
forms  compiled  towards  the  end  of  the 
seventh  century,  but  these  were  by  royal 
authority.  The  kings  of  France  were 
supreme  heads  of  their  national  church. 
Schmidt,  t.  i.  p.  382:  De  Marca,  1.  iii. 
<•.  16  ;  Pleury,  Institutions  au  Droit,  t.  i. 
p.  228.  Muratori,  Dissert.  70  (t.  iii. 
p.  1(14.  Italian),  is  of  opinion  that  ex- 
emptions of  monasteries  from  episcopal 
visitation  did  not  become  frequent  in 
Italy  till  the  eleventh  century:  and  that 
many  charters  of  this  kind  are  forgeries. 
It  is  held  also  by  some  English  anti- 
quaries that  no  Anglo-Saxon  monastery 
Was  exempt,  and  that  the  first  instance 
i-  that  of  Battle  Abbey  under  the  Con- 
queror; the  charters  of  an  earlier  date 
having  been  forged.  Hody  on  Convoca- 
tions, p.  30  ami  170.  It  is  remarkable 
that  this  giant  is  made  by  William,  and 
confirmed  by  Lanfranc.  Collier,  p.  256. 
Exemptions  became  very  usual  in  Eng- 
land afterwards.  Henry,  vol.  v.  p.  337. 
It  is  nevertheless   to  be  admitted    that 


the  bishops  had  exercised  an  arbitrary, 
and  sometimes  a  tyrannical  power  over 
the  secular  clergy  ;  and  after  the  monks 
became  part  of  the  church,  which  was 
before  the  close  of  the  sixth  century, 
they  also  fell  under  a  control  not  always 
fairly  exerted.  Both  complained  greatly, 
as  the  acts  of  councils  bear  witness :  — 
Un  fait  important  et  trop  peu  remarque 
se  revele  ca  et  la  dans  le  cours  de  cette 
epoque ;  e'est  la  lutte  des  pretrea  de 
paroisse contre  les  eveques.  Guizot.  Hist, 
de  la  Civilis.  en  France,  Lecon  13.  In 
this  contention  the  weaker  must  have 
given  way  :  but  the  regulars,  sustained 
by  public  respect,  and  having  the  coun- 
tenance of  the  see  of  Rome,  which  began 
to  encroach  upon  episcopal  authority, 
came  out  successful  in  securing  them- 
selves by  exemptions  from  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  bishops.  The  latter  furnished 
a  good  pretext  by  their  own  relaxation 
of  manners.  The  monasteries  in  the 
eighth  and  ninth  centuries  seem  not  to 
have  given  occasion  to  much  reproach, 
at  least  in  comparison  with  the  prelacy. 
Au  commencement  du  huitieme  Bi&cle, 
Feglise  etait  elle  tombee  dans  un  desordre 
presque  egal  a.  celui  de  la  societe  civile. 
Sans  superieurs  et  sans  inferieurs  a  re- 
douter,  degagea  de  la  surveillance  des 
metropolitans  comme  des  couciles  et  de 
1'influence  des  pretres,  une  foule  d*eve 
ques  se  livraient  aux  plus  scandaleui 
exces. 


Fccles   Power.       PAPAL  ENCROACHMENTS.  641 

of  monks  were  declared  exempt  at  a  single  stroke ;  and  the 
abuse  began  to  awaken  loud  complaints,  though  it  did  not  fail 
to  be  aggravated  afterwards. 

The   principle.-  of  ecclesiastical   supremacy  were  readily 
applied  by  the  popes  to  support  still  more  insolent  and  upon 
usurpations.      Chiefs  by  divine  commission  of  the  cmi  govem- 

iiii  ii  •  ii      inents. 

whole  church,  every  earthly  sovereign  must  be  sub- 
jeer  to  their  interference.  The  bishops  indeed  had,  Lothaire- 
with  the  common  weapons  of  their  order,  kept  their  own  sov- 
ereigns in  check;  and  it  could  not  seem  any  extraordinary 
stretch  in  their  supreme  head  to  assert  an  equal  prerogative. 
Gregory  IV.,  as  I  have  mentioned,  became  a  party  in  the 
revolt  against  Louis  I.,  but  he  never  carried  his  threats  of 
excommunication  into  effect.  The  first  instance  where  the 
Roman  pontiffs  actually  tried  the  force  of  their  arms  against 
a  sovereign  was  the  excommunication  of  Lothaire  king  of 
Lorraine,  and  grandson  of  Louis  the  Debonair.  This  prince 
had  repudiated  his  wife,  upon  unjust  pretexts,  but  with  the  ap- 
probation of  a  national  council,  and  had  subsequently  married 
his  concubine.  Nicolas  L,  the  actual  pope,  despatched  two 
legates  to  investigate  this  business,  and  decide  according  to 
the  canons.  They  hold  a  council  at  Metz,  and  confirm  the 
divorce  and  marriage.  Enraged  at  this  conduct  of  his  am- 
bassadors,  the  pope  summons  a  council  at  Rome,  annuls  the 
sentence,  deposes  the  archbishops  of  Treves  and  Cologne, 
and  directs  the  king  to  discard  his  mistress.  After  some 
shuffling  on  the  part  of  Lothaire  he  is  excommunicated  ;  and, 
in  a  short  time,  we  find  both  the  king  and  his  prelates,  who 
had  begun  with  expressions  of  passionate  contempt  towards 
the  pope,  suing  humbly  for  absolution  at  the  feet  of  Adrian 
II.,  successor  of  Nicolas,  which  was  not  granted  without  diffi- 
culty. In  all  its  most  impudent  pretensions  the  Holy  See  has 
attended  to  the  circumstances  of  the  time.  Lothaire  had 
powerful  neighbors,  the  kings  of  France  and  Germany,  eager 
to  invade  his  dominions  on  the  first  intimation  from  Rome ; 
while  the  real  scandalousness-  of  his  behavior  must  have 
intimidated  his  conscience,  and  disgusted  his  subjects. 

Excommunication,  whatever  opinions  may  be  entertained 
as  to  its  religious   efficacy,  was  originally  nothing  Excommuni- 
more  in  appearance  than  the  exercise  of  a  right0*'1008, 
which  every  society  claims,  the  expulsion  of  refractory  mem- 
bers from  its  body.    No  direct  temporal  disadvantages  attended 

VOL.  i.  — m.  41 


EXCOMMUNICATIONS.        Chap.  VU.  Pari  1 

this  penalty  for  several  ages;  but  as  it  was  (he  most  severe  of 
spiritual  censures,  and  tended  to  exclude  the  object  of  it  not 
only  from  u  participation  in  religious  rites,  but  in  a  consider- 
able degree  from  the  intercourse  of  Christian  society,  it  wa- 
used  sparingly  and  upon  the  gravest  occasions.  Gradually, 
as  the  church  became  more  powerful  and  more  imperious, 
excommunications  were  issued  upon  every  provocation,  rather 
as  a  weapon  of  ecclesiastical  warfare  than  with  any  regard  tc 
its  original  intention.  There  was  certainly  some  pretext  for 
many  of  these  censures,  as  the  only  means  of  defence  within 
the  reach  of  the  clergy  when  their  possessions  wen;  lawlessly 
violated.1  Others  were  founded  upon  the  necessity  of  en- 
forcing their  contentious  jurisdiction,  which,  while  it  was 
rapidly  extending  itself  over  almost  all  persons  and  causes, 
had  not  acquired  any  proper  coercive  process.  The  spiritual 
courts  in  England,  whose  jurisdiction  is  so  multifarious,  and, 
in  general,  so  little  of  a  religious  nature,  had  till  lately  no 
means  even  of  compelling  an  appearance,  much  less  of  en- 
forcing a  sentence,  but  by  excommunication.2  Princes  who 
felt  the  inadequacy  of  their  own  laws  to  secure  obedience 
called  in  the  assistance  of  more  formidable  sanctions.  Several 
capitularies  of  Charlemagne  denounce  the  penalty  of  excom- 
munication against  incendiaries  or  deserters  from  the  army. 
Charles  the  Bald  procured  similar  censures  against  his  re- 
volted vassals.  Thus  the  boundary  between  temporal  and 
spiritual  offences  grew  every  day  less  distinct ;  and  the  clergy 
were  encouraged  to  fresh  encroachments,  as  they  discovered 
the  secret  of  rendering  them  successful.3 

The  civil  magistrate  ought  undoubtedly  to  protect  the  just 
rights  and  lawful  jurisdiction  of  the  church.  It  is  not  so  evi- 
dent that  he  should  attach  temporal  penalties  to  her  censure.-. 
Excommunication  has  never  carried  such  a  presumption  of 
moral  turpitude  as  to  disable  a  man,  upon  any  solid  princi- 
ples, from  the  usual  privileges  of  society.  Superstition  and 
tyranny,  however,  decided  otherwise.  The  support  due  to 
church  censures  by  temporal  judges  is  vaguely  declared  in 
the  capitularies  of  Pepin  and  Charlemagne.  It  became  in 
later  ages  a  more  established  principle  in  France  and  Eng- 


i  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  217  ;  Fleury,  Insti-  a  process  in  contempt,  was  abolished  in 

tutions  au  Droit,  t.  ii.  p.  192.  Knjrland,  but  retained  in  Ireland. 

2  By  a  recent  statute,  53  Q.  III.  c.  127,  a  Mem.    <!e    l'Acad.    des    Inscript.    t 

the  writ  De  excommunicato  capiendo,  as  xxxix.  p.  596,  &o. 


fc.cci.Es.  Power.  INTERDICTS.  64o 

land,  and,  I  presume,  in  other  countries.  By  our  common 
law  an  excommunicated  person  is  incapable  of  being  a  wit- 
ness or  of  bringing  an  action ;  and  he  may  be  detained  in 
prison  until  he  obtains  absolution.  By  the  Establishments 
of  St.  Louis,  his  estate  or  person  might  be  attached  by  the 
magistrate.1  These  actual  penalties  were  attended  by  marks 
of  abhorrence  and  ignominy  still  more  calculated  to  make  an 
impression  on  ordinary  minds.  They  were  to  be  shunned, 
like  men  infected  with  leprosy,  by  their  servants,  their  friends, 
and  their  families.  Two  attendants  only,  if  we  may  trust  a 
current  history,  remained  with  Robert  king  of  France,  who, 
on  account  of  an  irregular  marriage,  was  put  to  this  ban  by 
Gregory  V.,  and  these  threw  all  the  meats  which  had  passed 
his  table  into  the  fire.'2  Indeed  the  mere  intercourse  with  a 
proscribed  person  incurred  what  was  called  the  lesser  ex- 
communication, or  privation  of  the  sacraments,  and  required 
penitence  and  absolution.  In  some  places  a  bier  was  set 
before  the  door  of  an  excommunicated  individual,  and  stones 
thrown  at  his  windows :  a  singular  method  of  compelling  his 
submission.8  Everywhere  the  excommunicated  were  debarred 
of  a  regular  sepulture,  which,  though  obviously  a  matter  of 
police,  has,  through  the  superstition  of  consecrating  burial- 
grounds,  been  treated  as  belonging  to  ecclesiastical  control. 
Their  carcasses  were  supposed  to  be  incapable  of  corruption, 
which  seems  to  have  been  thought  a  privilege  unfit  for  those 
who  had  died  in  so  irregular  a  manner.4 

But  as  excommunication,  which  attacked  only  one  and 
perhaps  a  hardened  sinner,  was  not  always  effica- 
3ious,  the  church  had  recourse  to  a  more  compre- 
hensive punishment.  For  the  offence  of  a  nobleman  she 
put  a  county,  for  that  of  a  prince  his  entire  kingdom,  under 
an  interdict  or  suspension  of  religious  offices.  No  stretch  of 
her  tyranny  was  perhaps  so  outrageous  as  this.  During  an 
interdict  the  churches  were  closed,  the  bells  silent,  the  dead 

1  Ordounances  des  Rois,  t.  i.  p.  121.  2  Velly,  t.  ii. 

But  an   excommunicated  person   might  8  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  iii 

sue  in  the  lay,  though  not  in  the  spirit-  Appendix,  p   350 ;  Du  Cange,  v.  Excoin 

ual  court.    No  law  seems  to  have  been  so  inunicatio. 

severe  in  this  respect  as  that  of  England  ;  *  Du  Cange,  v.  Imblocatus  :  where 
though  it  is  not  strictly  accurate  to  say  several  authors  are  referred  to,  for  the 
with  Dr.  Cosens  (Gibson's  Codex,  p.  1102),  constant  opinion  among  the  members  of 
that  the  writ  De  excommun.  capiendo  the  G reek  church,  that  the  bodies  of  ex- 
is  a  privilege  peculiar  to  the  English  communicated  persons  remain  in  statu 
•hurch  quo 


,;j  J  INTERDICTS.  Ciixr.  VII.  Part  I 

unburie  1,  no  rite  hut  those  of  baptism  and  extreme  unction 
performed.  The  penalty  fell  upon  those  who  had  neither 
partaken  nor  could  have  prevented  the  offence ;  and  the 
offence  was  often  but  a  private  dispute,  in  which  the  pride  of 
a  pope  or  bishop  had  been  wounded.  Interdicts  were  so  rare 
before  the  time  of  Gregory  VIL,  that  some  have  referred 
them  to  him  as  their  author ;  instances  may  however  be  found 
of  an  earlier  date,  and  especially  that  which  accompanied  the 
above-mentioned  excommunication  of  Robert  king  of  France. 
They  were  afterwards  issued  not  unfrequently  against  king 
doms ;  but  in  particular  districts  they  continually  occurred.1 
This  was  the  mainspring  of  the  machinery  that  the  clergy 
set  in  motion,  the  lever  by  which  they  moved  the  world. 
From  the  moment  that  these  interdicts  and  excommunications 
had  been  tried  the  powsrs  of  the  earth  might  be  said  to  have 
existed  only  by  sufferance.  Nor  wras  the  validity  of  such 
denunciations  supposed  to  depend  upon  their  justice.  The 
imposer  indeed  of  an  unjust  excommunication  was  guilty  of 
a  sin ;  but  the  party  subjected  to  it  had  no  remedy  but  sub- 
mission. He  who  disregards  such  a  sentence,  says  Beau- 
manoir,  renders  his  good  cause  bad.2  And  indeed,  without 
annexing  so  much  importance  to  the  direct  consequences  of 
an  ungrounded  censure,  it  is  evident  that  the  received  theory 
of  religion  concerning  the  indispensable  obligation  and  mys- 
terious efficacy  of  the  rights  of  communion  and  confession 
must  have  induced  scrupulous  minds  to  make  any  temporal 
sacrifice  rather  than  incur  their  privation.  One  is  rather 
surprised  at  the  instances  of  failure  than  of  success  in  the 
employment  of  these  spiritual  weapons  against  sovereigns  or 
the  laity  in  general.  It  was  perhaps  a  fortunate  circumstance 
for  Europe  that  they  were  not  introduced,  upon  a  large  scale, 
during  the  darkest  ages  of  superstition.  In  the  eighth  or 
ninth  centuries  they  would  probably  have  met  with  a  more 
implicit  obedience.  But  after  Gregory  VII.,  as  the  spirit  of 
ecclesiastical  usurpation  became  more  violent,  there  grew  up 
by  slow  degrees  an  opposite  feeling  in  the  laity,  which  ripen- 
ed into  an  alienation  of  sentiment  from  the  church,  and  a 
conviction  of  that  sacred  truth  which  superstition  and  soph- 
istry have  endeavored  to  eradicate  from  the  heart  of  man, 

3  Giannone,  1.  vii.  c.  1 ;  Schmidt,  t.  iv.     plina,   p.   288;   St.  Marc,  t.  ii.  p.  636 
p.  220  ;   Dupin,  De  antiqua  Eccl.  Disci-    Fleury,  Institutions,  t.  ii.  p.  200. 

2  d.  261. 


Cccles.  Power.      USURPATION   OF   THE   POPES.  645 

that  no  tyrannical   government  can   be  founded  on  a  divine 
commission. 

Excommunications    had   very   seldom,  if   ever,  been   lev- 
elled at  the  head  of  a  sovereign  before  the  instance 
of  Lothaire.     His  ignominious  submission  and  the  usurpation 
general   feebleness  of  the   Carlovingian  line   pro-  of  the 

in  •  •  c      i  i  i     •      popes. 

iluced  a  repetition  ot  the  menace  at  least,  and  in 
cases  more  evidently  beyond  the  cognizance  of  a  spiritual 
authority.  Upon  the  death  of  this  Lothaire,  his  uncle  Charles 
the  Bald  having  possessed  himself  of  Lorraine,  to  which  the 
emperor  Louis  II.  had  juster  pretensions,  the  pope  Adrian 
II.  warned  him  to  desist,  declaring  that  any  attempt  upon 
that  country  would  bring  down  the  penalty  of  excommunica- 
tion. Sustained  by  the  intrepidity  of  Hincmar,  the  king  did 
not  exhibit  his  usual  pusillanimity,  and  the  pope  in  this  in- 
stance failed  of  success.1  But  John  VIII.,  the  next  occupier 
of  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  carried  his  pretensions  to  a  height 
which  none  of  his  predecessors  had  reached.  The  Carlovingian 
princes  had  formed  an  alliance  against  Boson,  the  usurper  of 
the  kingdom  of  Aries.  The  pope  writes  to  Charles  the  Fat, 
"  I  have  adopted  the  illustrious  prince  Boson  as  my  son  ;  be 
content  therefore  with  your  own  kingdom,  for  I  shall  instant- 
ly excommunicate  all*  who  attempt  to  injure  my  son."'2  In 
another  letter  to  the  same  king,  who  had  taken  some  prop- 
erty from  a  convent,  he  enjoins  him  to  restore  it  within  sixty 
days,  and  to  certify  by  an  envoy  that  he  had  obeyed  the  com- 
mand, else  an  excommunication  would  immediately  ensue,  to 
be  followed  by  still  severer  castigation,  if  the  king  should  not 
repent  upon  the  first  punishment.3  These  expressions  seem 
to  intimate  a  sentence  of  deposition  from  his  throne,  and  thus 
anticipate  by  two  hundred  years  the  famous  era  of  Gregory 
VII.,  at  which  we  shall  soon  arrive.  In  some  respects  John 
VIII.  even  advanced  pretensions  beyond  those  of  Gregory. 
He  asserts  very  plainly  a  right  of  choosing  the  emperor,  and 
may  seem  indirectly  to  have  exercised  it  in  the  election  of 
Charles  the  Bald,  who  had  not  primogeniture  in  his  favor.4 
This  prince,  whose  restless  ambition  was  united  with  mean- 
ness as  well  as  insincerity,  consented  to  sign  a  capitulation. 


i  De  Marca,  1.  iv.  c.  11.  *  Baluz.    Capitularia,    t.    U.    p.   251 

*  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  260.  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  -    197. 

8  Durioribus    deinceps    sciens   te  ver 
OeribuB  erudiendum.     Schmidt,  p.  261. 


646  CORRUPTION   OF  MORALS.     Chaf.  VII.  Pari    I 

on  his  coronation  at  Rome,  in  favor  of  the  pope  and  church, 
a  precedent  which  was  improved  upon  in  subsequent  ages.1 
Rome  was  now  prepared  to  rivet  her  fetters  upon  sovereigns, 
and  at  no  period  have  the  condition  of  society  and  the  cir- 
cumstances of  civil  government  been  so  favorable  for  her 
ambition.  But  the  consummatijn  was  still  bus* 
iegeneracy  pended,  and  even  her  progress  arrested,  for  more 
eenturtenth  tnan  a  hundred  and  fifty  years.  This  drear)-  inter- 
val is  filled  up,  in  the  annals  of  the  papacy,  by  a 
series  of  revolutions  and  crimes.  Six  popes  were  deposed, 
two  murdered,  one  mutilated.  Frequently  two  or  even  three 
competitors,  among  whom  it  is  not  always  possible  by  any 
genuine  criticism  to  distinguish  the  true  shepherd,  drove  each 
other  alternately  from  the  city.  A  few  respectable  names 
appear  thinly  scattered  through  this  darkness ;  and  some- 
times, perhaps,  a  pope  who  had  acquired  estimation  by  his 
private  virtues  may  be  distinguished  by  some  encroachment 
on  the  rights  of  princes  or  the  privileges  of  national  churches. 
But  in  general  the  pontiffs  of  that  age  had  neither  leisure  nor 
capacity  to  perfect  the  great  system  of  temporal  supremacy, 
and  looked  rather  to  a  vile  profit  from  the  sale  of  episcopal 
confirmations,  or  of  exemptions  to  monasteries.2 

The  corruption  of  the  head  extended  naturally  to  all  other 
Corruption  members  of  the  church.  All  writers  concur  in 
of  morals.  stigmatizing  the  dissoluteness  and  neglect  of  de- 
cency that  prevailed  among  the  clergy.  Though  several 
codes  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  had  been  compiled  by  par- 
ticular prelates,  yet  neither  these  nor  the  ancient  canons 
were  much  regarded.  The  bishops,  indeed,  who  were  to 
enforce  them  had  most  occasion  to  dread  their  severity. 
They  were  obtruded  upon  their  sees,  as  the  supreme  pontiffs 
were  upon  that  of  Rome,  by  force  or  corruption.  A  child 
of  five  years  old  was  made  archbishop  of  Rheims.  The  see 
of  Narbonne  wa<  purchased  for  another  at  the  age  of  ten.3 
By  this  relaxation  of  morals  the  priesthood  began  to  lose  its 
hold  upon  the  prejudices  of  mankind.  These  are  nourished 
chiefly  indeed  by  shining  examples  of  piety  and  virtue,  hut 
also,  in  a  superstitious  age,  by  ascetic  observances,  by  the  f'ast- 

i  Schmidt,  t.  ii.  p.  199.  p.  252.     It  wa8  almost  general  in  the 

2  Schmidt,   t.   ii.   p.    414 ;    Mosheim ;  church   to  have  bishops  under  twenty 

St.  Marc;  Muratori,  Ann.  d'Ttalia,  pas-  years   old-     Id.  p.   149.     Even  the  pop* 

8im.  Benedict  IX.  is  said  to  hive  been  onl) 

8  Vaissette,  Hist,  de  Languedoc,  t.  ii  twelve,  but  this  has  been  doubted. 


Eccles.  Power.        NEGLECT   OF  CELIBACY.  617 

ing  and  watching  of  monks  and  hermits,  who  have  obviously 
so  bad  a  lot  in  this  life,  that  men  are  induced  to  conclude  that 
they  must  have  secured  a  better  reversion  in  futurity.  The 
regular  clergy  accordingly,  or  monastic  orders,  who  practised, 
at  least  apparently,  the  specious  impostures  of  self-mortifica- 
tion, retained  at  all  times  a  far  greater  portion  of  respect 
than  ordinary  priests,  though  degenerated  themselves,  as  was 
admitted,  from  their  primitive  strictness. 

Two  crimes,  of  at  least  violations  of  ecclesiastical  law,  had 
become  almost  universal  in  the  eleventh  century,  Ne2lectof 
and  excited  general  indignation  —  the  marriage  or  the  rules  of 
concubinage  of  priests,  and  the  sale  of  benefices.  ce  1  ™7' 
By  an  effect  of  those  prejudices  in  favor  of  austerity  to  which 
X  have  just  alluded,  celibacy  had  been,  from  very  early  times, 
enjoined  as  an  obligation  upon  the  clergy.     It  was  perhaps 
permitted  that  those  already  married  for  the  fir?t  time,  and  to 
a  virgin,  might  receive  ordination  ;  and  this,  after  prevailing 
for  a  length  of  time  in  the  Greek  church,  was  sanctioned  by 
the  council  of  Trullo  in  69 1,1  and  has  ever  since  continued 

l  This  council  was   held   at  Constan-  feeble  barrier  to  the  impulse  of  the  pas- 

tinople  in  the  dome  of  the  palace,  called  sions."  Ang. -Sax.  Church,  p.  176.    What- 

Trullus,   by   the   Latins.     The   nomina-  ever  may  have  been  the  case  in  England, 

tive  Trullo,  though  soloecistical,  is  used,  those  who  look  at  the  abstract  of  the 

I    believe,    by   ecclesiastical    writers    in  canons  of  French  and  Spanish  councils, 

English.     St.  Marc,  t.  i.  p.  294;  Art  de  in  Dupin's  Ecclesiastical  History,   from 

verifier  les  Dates,  t.  i.   p.  157  ;  Fleury,  the  sixth  to  the  eleventh  century,  will 

Hist.  Eccles.   t.  x.   p.  110.     Bishops  are  find    hardly   one  wherein    there  is    not 

not  within  this  permission,  and  cannot  some  enactment  against  bishops  or  priests 

retain  their  wives  by  the  discipline  of  the  retaining  wives   in   their  houses.     Such 

Greek  church.     Lingard  says  of  the  An-  provisions   were  not  repeated   certainly 

glo-Saxon  church,  —  u  During  more  than  without  reason;  so  that  the  remark  of 

200  years  from  the  death  of  Augustin  the  Fleury,  t.  xi.  p.  594,  that  he  has  found 

laws  respecting  clerical  celibacy,  so  gall-  no  instance  of  clerical   marriage  before 

ing  to  the  natural  propensities  of  man,  893,  cannot  weigh  for  a  great  deal.     It  is 

but  so  calculated  to  enforce  an  elevated  probable  that  bishops  did  not  often  marry 

idea  of  the  sanctity  which  becomes  the  after  their  consecration  ;  but  this  cannot 

priesthood,   were   enforced  with  the  ut-  be  presumed  of  priests.     Southey,  in  his 

most  rigor:  but  during  part  of  the  ninth  Vindic/a?    Ecclesise    Anglicanje,    p.   290, 

century  and  most  of  the  tenth,  when  the  while   he   produces    some    instances   of 

repeated  and  sanguinary  devastations  of  clerical   matrimony,    endeavors   to   mis- 

the  Danes  threatened  the  destruction  of  lead  the  reader  into  the  supposition  that 

the  hierarchy  no  less  than  of  the  govern-  it  was  even  conformable  to  ecclesiastical 

ment,  the  ancient  canons  opposed  but  a  canons.* 

*  A  late  writer,  who  has  glosed  over  every  fact  in  ecclesiastical  history  which 
could  make  against  his  own  particular  tenets,  asserts,  —  "  In  the  earliest  ages  of  the 
church  no  restriction  whatever  had  been  placed  on  the  clergy  in  this  respect." 
Palmer's  Compendious  Ecclesiastical  History,  p.  115  This  may  be,  and  I  believe 
it  is,  very  true  of  the  Apostolical  period;  but  the  "earliest  ages'1''  are  generally 
undeintood  to  go  further:  and  certainly  the  prohibition  of  marriage  to  priests  was 
an  established  custom  of  some  antiquity  at  the  time  of  the  Nicene  council.  The 
question  agitated  there  was,  not  whether  priests  should  marry,  contrary  as  it  was 
admitted  by  their  advocate  to  apxdla  tKKkriaiaq  irapcuhoic,  but  whether  married 
men  should  be  ordained.  I  do  not  see  any  difference  in  principle  ;  but  the  cbirwb 
aad  made  one. 


G48  NEGLECT  OF  THE         Chap.  VII.  I  art  I. 

one  of  the  distinguishing  features  of  its  discipline.  The 
Latin  church,  however,  did  not  receive  these  canons,  and  has 
uniformly  persevered  in  excluding  the  three  orders  of  priests, 
deacons,  and  subdeacons,  not  only  from  contacting  matri- 
mony, but  from  cohabiting  with  wives  espoused  before  their 
ordination.  The  prohibition,  however,  during  some  ages  ex- 
isted only  in  the  letter  of  her  canons.  In  every  country  the 
secular  or  parochial  clergy  kept  women  in  their  houses,  upon 
more  or  less  acknowledged  terms  of  intercourse,  by  a  conni- 
vance of  their  ecclesiastical  superiors,  which  almost  amounted 
to  a  positive  toleration.  The  sons  of  priests  were  capable  of 
inheriting  by  the  law  of  France  and  also  of  Castile.1  Some 
vigorous  efforts  had  been  made  in  England  by  Dunstan,  with 
the  assistance  of  King  Edgar,  to  dispossess  the  married 
canons,  if  not  the  parochial  clergy,  of  their  benefices ;  but 
the  abuse,  if  such  it  is  to  be  considered,  made  incessant  prog- 
ress, till  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century.  There  was 
certainly  much  reason  for  the  rulers  of  the  church  to  restore 
this  part  of  their  discipline,  since  it  is  by  cutting  off  her 
members  from  the  charities  of  domestic  life  that  she  secures 
their  entire  affection  to  her  cause,  and  renders  them,  like 
veteran  soldiers,  independent  of  every  feeling  but  that  of 
fidelity  to  their  commander  and  regard  to  the  interests  of 
their  body.  Leo  IX.  accordingly,  one  of  the  first  pontiffs 
who  retrieved  the  honor  of  the  apostolic  chair,  after  its  long 
period  of  ignominy,  began  in  good  earnest  the  difficult  work 
of  enforcing  celibacy  among  the  clergy.2  His  successors 
lever  lost  sight  of  this  essential  point  of  discipline.  It  was 
a  struggle  against  the  natural  rights  and  strongest  affections 
of  mankind,  which  lasted  for  several  ages,  and  succeeded 
only  by  the  toleration  of  greater  evils  than  those  it  was  in- 
tended to  remove.  The  laity,  in  general,  took  part  against 
the  married  priests,  who  were  reduced  to  infamy  and  want, 
or  obliged  to  renounce  their  dearest  connections.  In  many 
parts  of  Germany  no  ministers  were  left  to  perform  divine 
services.3      But   perhaps  there   was  no   country  where  the 

1  Uecueil  des  Historiens,  t.  xi.  preface.  2  St.  Marc,  t.  iii.  p.  152,  164,  219,  602, 

Marina,  Ensayo  sobre  las  Siete  Partidas,  &c. 

c.  221,  223.     This  was  by  virtue  of  the  >  Schmidt,   t.   iii.   p.   279;   Martenne, 

general   indulgence  shown   by  the  cus-  Thesaurus   Anecdotorum,    t.    i.    p.  230. 

toms  of  that  country  to  concubinage,  or  A    Danish    writer  draws   a    still    darker 

baragania;  the  children  of  such  an  union  picture  of  the  tyranny  exercised  towards 

always  inheriting  in  default  of*  those  born  the  married  clergy,  which,  if  he  does  not 

in  solemn  wedlock.     Ibid.  exaggerate,  was  severe  indeed  :  alii  mem 


fcccLEs.  Power. 


RULES   OF   CELIBACY. 


649 


rules  of  celibacy  met  with  so  little  attention  as  in  England. 
It  was  acknowledged  in  the  reign  of  Henry  I.  that  the 
greater  and  better  part  of  the  clergy  were  married,  and  that 
prince  is   said  to  have  permitted  them  to  retain   their  wives.1 


oris  truncabantur.  alii  occidebantur.  alii 
cle  patria  expellebantur,  pauci  sua  reti- 
nuere.  Laugebek,  Script.  Rerum  Da- 
uicarum,  t.  i.  p.  3S0.  Tbe  prohibition 
was  repeated  by  Waldemar  II.  in  1222, 
so  tbat  tbere  seems  to  nave  been  much 
difficulty  found.     Id.  p.  287  and  p.  272. 

l  Wilkius,  Concilia,  p.  387  ;  Cbronicon 
Saxon ;  Collier,  p.  218,  286,  291 ;  Lyttel- 
fcon,  vol.  iii.  p.  328.  The  third  Lateran 
council  fifty  years  afterwards  speaks  of 
the  detestable  custom  of  keeping  concu- 
bines long  used  by  the  English  clergv. 
Cum  in  AugliA  prava  et  detestabili  con- 
suet  udiue  et  luugo  tempore  fuerit  obten- 
tum,  ut  clerici  In  domibus  suia  fornica- 
rias  habeaut.  Labbe.  Concilia,  t.  x.  p. 
1633.  Eugeuius  IV.  sent  a  legate  to  im- 
pose celibacy  on  the  Irish  clergv.  Lyt- 
telton's  Henry  II.  vol.  ii.  p.  42. 

The  English  clergy  long  set  at  nought 
the  fuhninations  of  the  pope  against 
their  domestic  happiness  ;  and  the  com- 
mon law,  or  at  least  irresistible  custom, 
seems  to  have  been  their  shield.  There 
is  some  reason  to  believe  that  their  chil- 
dren were  legitimate  for  the  purposes  of 
inheritance,  which,  however,  I  do  not 
assert.  The  sons  of  priests  are  men- 
tioned in  several  instruments  of  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  ;  but  we 
cannot  be  sure  that  they  were  not  born 
before  their  fathers'  ordination,  or  that 
they  were  reckoned  legitimate.* 

An  instance  however  occurs  in  the 
Rot.  Cur.  Regis,  a.o.  1194,  where  the 
assize  find  that  there  has  been  no  presen- 
tation to  the  church  of  Dunstan,  but  the 
parsons  have  held  it  from  father  to  son. 
Sir  Francis  Palgrave.  in  his  Introduction 
to  these  records  (p.  29),  gives  other  proofs 
of  this  hereditary  succession  in  bene- 
fices. Giraldus  Cambrensis.  about  the 
end  of  Henry  II.  s  reign  (apud  Wright's 
Political  Songs  of  England,  p.  353),  men- 
tions the  marriage  of  the  parochial  clergy 
as  almost  universal.  More  sacerdotum 
parochial! urn  Anglise  fere  cunctorum 
lamnabili  quidem  et  detestabili,  publi- 
c-am secuin  habebat  comitem  individuam, 
et  in  focofocariain,  et  in  cubiculo  concu- 
binain.  They  were  called  focaria,  as 
living  at  the  same  hearth';  and  this 
might  be  tolerated,  perhaps,  on  pretence 


of  service;  but  the  fellowship,  we  per- 
ceive, was  not  confined  to  the  fireside. 
It  was  about  this  time  that  a  poem,  De 
Concubinis  Sacerdotum.  commonly  at- 
tributed to  Walter  Mapes.  but  alluding 
by  name  to  Pope  Innocent  III.,  humor- 
ously defends  the  uncanonical  usage.  It 
begins  thus  :  — 

"  Prisciani  regula  peuitus  cassatur, 
Sacerdos  per  /tic  et  hac  olim  declioa 

batur, 
Sed  per  hie  solummodo  nunc  articu 

latur, 
Cum  per  nostrum  praesulem  hire,  amo- 

veatur." 

The  last  hues  are  better  known,  having 
been  often  quoted  :  — 

"Ecce   jam   pro    clericis   multum   alle- 

gavi, 
Necnon  pro  presbyteris  multa  compro- 

bavi  ; 
Pater-noster  nunc    pz-o   me,   quoniam 

peccavi, 
Dicat    quisque    presbyter    cum    sua 

suavi." 
Poems  ascribed  to  Mapes,  p.  171.     (Cam- 
den Society,  1841.) 

Several  other  poems  in  this  very  cu- 
rious volume  allude  to  the  same  subject. 
In  a  dialogue  between  a  priest  and  a 
scholar,  the  latter  having  taxed  him  with 
keeping  a  presbytera  in  his  house,  the 
parson  defends  himself  by  recrimina- 
tion :  — 

"  Malo  cum  presbytera  pulcra  fornicari, 
Servituros  domino  filios  lucrari, 
Quam  vagas  satellites   per  antra   sec- 

tari ; 
Est  inhonestissimum  sic  dehonestari.'' 
(p.  256.) 

John,  on  occasion  of  the  interdict  pro- 
nounced against  him  iu  1208,  seized  th« 
concubiuesof  the  priests  and  compelled 
them  to  redeem  themselves  by  a  fiue. 
Presbyterorum  et  clericorum  focariae  per 
totam  Angliam  a  ministris  regis  captai 
sunt,  et  ad  se  redimendum  graviter  com- 
pulse. Matt.  Paris,  p.  190.  This  is 
omitted  by  Lingard. 

It  is  said  by  Kaumer  (Gesch.  der  Ho- 
henstauffen,  vi.  235)   that    there   was   a 


*  Among  the  witnesses  to  some  instruments  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I.,  printed 
by  Mr.  Hudson  (Jurney  from  the  court-rolls  of  the  manor  of  Keswick  iu  Norfolk, 
we  have  more  than  once  Walter  filius  presbj  ten.  But  the  rest  arc  described  by  th« 
father's  surname,  except  one.  who  is  called  filius  Beatricis  ;  and  as  he  may  be  sua 
pected  of  being  illegitimate,  we  cannot  infer  the  contrary  as  to  the  priest's  son. 


650  EPISCOPAL   ELECTIONS.      Chap.  VII.  Part  I 

But  the  hierarchy  never  relaxed  in  their  efforts ;  and  all  the 
councils,  general  or  provincial,  of  the  twelfth  century,  utter 
denunciations  against  concubinary  priests.1  After  that  age 
we  do  not  find  them  so  frequently  mentioned;  and  the  abuse 
by  degrees,  though  not  suppressed,  was  reduced  within  limits 
at    which  the  church  might  connive. 

Simony,  or  the  corrupt  purchase  of  spiritual  benefices,  was 
the  second  characteristic  reproach  of  the  clergy  in 
the  eleventh  century.  The  measures  taken  to  re- 
press it  deserve  particular  consideration,  as  they  produced 
effects  of  the  highest  importance  in  the  history  of  the  middle 
Episcopal  ages.  According  to  the  primitive  custom  of  the 
elections.  church,  an  episcopal  vacancy  was  filled  up  by 
election  of  the  clergy  and  people  belonging  to  the  city  or  dio- 
uese.  The  subject  of  their  choice  was,  after  the  establish- 
ment of  the  federate  or  provincial  system,  to  be  approved  or 
rejected  by  the  metropolitan  and  his  suffragans ;  and,  if  ap- 
proved, he  was  consecrated  by  them.2  It  is  probable  that,  in 
almost  every  case,  the  clergy  took  a  leading  part  in  the  selec 
tion  of  their  bishops ;  but  the  consent  of  the  laity  was  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  render  it  valid.3  They  were,  however, 
by  degrees,  excluded  from  any  real  participation,  first  in  the 
Greek,  and  finally  in  the  western  church.  But  this  was  not 
effected  till  pretty  late  times;  the  people  fully  preserved  their 
elective  rights  at  Milan  in  the  eleventh  century,  and  traces 
of  their  concurrence  may  be  found  both  in  France  and  Ger- 
many in  the  next  age.4 

married  bishop  of  Prague  during  the  Cange,  v.  Focaria.  A  writer  of  respect- 
pontificate  of  Innocent  III.,  and  that  the  able  authority  asserts  that  the  clergy 
custom  of  clerical  marriages  lasted  in  frequently  obtained  a  bishop's  license  to 
Hungary  and  Sweden  to  the  end  of  the  cohabit  with  a  mate.  Harmer's  [Whar- 
thirteenth  century.  ton's]  Observations  on  Burnet,  p.  11.  I 
The  marriages  of  English  clergy  are  find  a  passage  in  Nicholas  de  Clemangia 
ooticed  and  condemned  in  some  provin-  about  1400,  quoted  iu  Lewis's  Lite  of 
:ial  constitutions  of  1237.     Matt.  Paris,  Pecock,  p.  30.     Plerisque  in   diooesinus, 

f.  381.     And   there  is,  even  so   late  as  rectores   parochiarum   ex   certo  et   con- 

404,  a  mandate  by  the  bishop  of  Exeter  ducto  cum  his  prselatis  pretio,  passim  et 

fcgainst   married  priests.     Wilkins,  Con-  publice  concubinas  tenent.     Tliis.  how- 

eilia,  t.  iii.  p.  277.  ever,  does  not  amount  to  a  direct  license. 

1  Quidain  sacerdotes   Latini,  says  In-  -  Marca,  de  Concordantia,  &c.  l.vi.  C.2. 

nocent  III.,  in  domibus  suis  habent  con-  3  Father  Paul  on  Benefices,  c.  7. 

cubinas,  et  nonnulli  aliquas  sibi  non  me-  4  De  Marca,  ubi  supra.     Schmidt,  t.  iv. 

tuunt  desponsare.     Opera  Innocent  III.  p.  173.     The  form  of  election  of  a  bish.p 

p.  558.     See  also  p.  300  and  p.  407.     The  of  Puy,  in  1053,  runs  thus  :  clerus.  popu- 

latter  cannot  be  supposed  a  very  common  lus,  et  militia  elegimus.     Vaissette,  Hist. 

case,  after   so   many    prohibitions;    the  de   Languedoc     t.   i;.   Appendix,  p.  220. 

more  usual  practice  was  to  keep  a  female  Even   GratKn    seems   to   admit    in    one 

in  their  houses,  under  some  pretence  of  place  that  tb*   laity  had  a  sort  of  shire, 

relationship  or  servitude,  as  is  still  said  though  no  decisive  roice,  in  filling  up  an 

to  be  usual  in  Catholic  countries.     Du  episcopal   vacancy       Electio  clerioorurc 


*.ccles.  Power.  INVESTITURES.  651 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  early  Christian  emperors  inter- 
posed with  the  freedom  of  choice  any  further  than  to  make 
their  own  confirmation  necessary  in  the  great  patriarchal 
sees,  such  as  Rome  and  Constantinople,  which  were  frequent 
ly  the  objects  of  violent  competition,  and  to  decide  in  contro- 
verted elections.1  The  Gothic  and  Lombard  kings  of  Italy 
followed  the  same  line  of  conduct.2  But  in  the  French  mon- 
archv  a  more  extensive  authority  was  assumed  by  the  sover- 
eign. Though  the  practice  was  subject  to  some  variation,  it 
may  be  said  generally  that  the  Merovingian  kings,  the  line 
of  Charlemagne,  and  the  German  emperors  of  the  house  ©f 
Saxony,  conferred  bishoprics  either  by  direct  nomination,  or, 
as  was  more  regular,  by  recommendatory  letters  to  the  elec- 
tors.3 In  England  also,  before  the  conquest,  bishops  were  ap- 
pointed in  the  witenagemot ;  and  even  in  the  reign  of 
William  it  is  said  that  Lanfranc  was  raised  to  the  see  of 
Canterbury  by  consent  of  parliament.4  But,  independently 
of  this  prerogative,  which  length  of  time  and  the  tacit  sanc- 
tion of  the  people  have  rendered  unquestionably  legitimate, 
the  sovereign  had  other  means  of  controlling  the  election  of  a 
bishop.  Those  estates  and  honors  which  compose  the  tem- 
poralities of  the  see,  and  without  which  the  naked  spiritual 
privileges  would  not  have  tempted  an  avaricious  generation, 
had  chiefly  been  granted,  by  former  kings,  and  were  assimi- 
lated to  lands  held  on  a  beneficiary  tenure.  As  they  seemed 
to  partake  of  the  nature  of  fiefs,  they  required  similar  formal- 
ities— investiture  by  the  lord,  and  an  oath  of  fealty  Investiture8< 
by  the  tenant.  Charlemagne  is  said  to  have  in- 
troduced  this   practice ;  and,  by  way  of  visible  symbol,  as 

est,  petitio  plebis.     Decret.  1.  i.  distinctio  inagne  is  said  to  have  adhered   to   this 

62.     And  other  subsequent  passages  con-  limitation,  leaving    elections    free,    and 

firm  this.  only  approving  the  person,  and  confer- 

i  Gibbon,    c.    20 ;     St.    Marc,    Abrege  ring   investiture  on   him.      F.    Paul   on 

Chrouologique,  t.  i.  p.  7.  Benefices,  c.  xv.     But  a  more  direct  in- 

2  Fra  Paolo  on  Benefices,  c.  ix.  ;  Gian-  fluence  was  restored  afterwards.  Ivon 
none,  1.  iii.  c.  6 :  1.  iv.  c.  12  ;  St.  Marc,  t.  i.  bishop  of  Chartres.  about  the  year  1100, 
p.  37  thus  concisely  expresses  the  several  par- 

3  Schmidt,  t.  i.  p.  386;  t.  ii.  p.  245,487-  ties  concurring  in  the  creation  of  a 
This  interference  of  the  kings  was  per-  bishop  :  eligente  clero,  suffragante  po- 
haps  not  quite  conformable  to  their  own  pulo,  dono  regis,  per  manuni  metropoli 
laws,  which  only  reserved  to  them  the  tani,  approbante  Romano  pontifice  Du 
confirmation.  Episcopo  decedente,  says  Chesne,  Script,  lteruin  Gallicarum,  t.  iv 
a  constitution  of  Clotaire  II.  in  615,  in  p.  17  4. 

loco   ipsius,    qui   a    metropolitano    ordi-  4  Lyttelton's  Hist,  of  Henry  IT.  vol.  iv. 

nari  debet,  a  piovincialibus,  a  clero  et  p.  144.    But  the  passage,  which  he  quotei 

populc  elnratur*  et  si  persona  condigna  from  the  Saxou  Oluouicle,  is  not  found ir 

fuerit,  per  ordinationem  principisordine-  the  best  edition. 
tur.     Baluz.  Oapitul.  t.  i.  p.  21.     Charle- 


052  CONFIRMATION   OF  TOPES.      Chap.  VII.  Part  I 

usual  in  feudal  institutions,  to  have  put  the  ring  and  crozier 
into  the  hands  of  the  newly  consecrated  bishop.  And  this 
continued  for  more  than  two  centuries  afterwards  without  ex- 
citing any  scandal  or  resistance.1 

The  church  has  undoubtedly  surrendered  part  of  her 
independence  in  return  for  ample  endowments  and  temporal 
power;  nor  could  any  claim  be  more  reasonable  than  that  of 
feudal  superiors  to  grant  the  investiture  of  dependent  fiefs. 
But  the  fairest  right  may  be  sullied  by  abuse ;  and  the 
sovereigns,  the  lay  patrons,  the  prelates  of  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries,  made  their  powers  of  nomination  and 
investiture  subservient  to  the  grossest  rapacity.2  According 
to  the  ancient  canons,  a  benefice  was  avoided  by  any  siraoni- 
acal  payment  or  stipulation.  If  these  were  to  be  enforced, 
the  church  must  almost  be  cleared  of  its  ministers.  Either 
through  bribery  in  places  where  elections  still  prevailed,  or 
through  corrupt  agreements  with  princes,  or  at  least  cus- 
tomary presents  to  their  wives  and  ministers,  a  large  propor- 
tion of  the  bishops  had  no  valid  tenure  in  their  sees.  The 
case  was  perhaps  worse  with  inferior  clerks;  in  the  church 
of  Milan,  which  was  notorious  for  this  corruption,  not  a  single 
ecclesiastic  could  stand  the  test,  the  archbishop  exacting  a 
price  for  the  collation  of  every  benefice.3 

The  bishops  of  Rome,  like  those  of  inferior  sees,  were 
regularly  elected  by  the  citizens,  laymen  as  well  as  ecclesi- 
astics. But  their  consecration  was  deferred  until  the  popular 
imperial  choice  had  received  the  sovereign's  sanction.  The 
confirmation  Romans  regularly  despatched  letters  to  Constanti- 
nople or  to  the  exarchs  of  Ravenna,  praying  that 
their  election  of  a  pope  might  be  confirmed.  Exceptions, 
if  any,  are  infrequent  while  Rome  was  subject  to  the  eastern 
empire.4  This,  among  other  imperial  prerogatives,  Charle 
magne  might  consider  as  his  own.  He  possessed  the  city 
especially  after  his  coronation  as  emperor,  in  full  sovereignty 

iDe  Marea,    p.  416;  Giannone,  1.  vi.  '  St.  Mara,  t.  iii    p.  65,  188,  219.  230, 

8.  7.  296,  568;  Muratori.  a.d.  958,  1057,  &c; 

*  Boniface  marquis  of  Tuscany,  father  Fleury,  Hist.  Eccles.  t.  xiii.  p.  73.  The 
of  the  countess  Matilda,  and  by  far  the  sum  however  appears  to  have  been  very 
greatest  prince  in  Italy,  was  flogged  be-  small:  rather  like  a  fee  than  a  bribe, 
fore  the  altar  by  an  abbot  for  selling  *  Le  Blanc,  Dissertation  BUT  1' Auto- 
benefices.  Muratori,  art.  aim.  1046.  The  rite  des  Bmpereurs.  This  is  subjoined 
offence  was  much  more  common  than  the  to  his  Traite  des  Bionnoyes;  but  uot  in 
punishment,  but  the  two  combined  fur-  all  copies,  which  makes  those  that  want 
nish  a  good  specimen  of  the  eleventh  it  less  valuable  St  Marc  and  M uratori, 
century.  passim 


Eccles.  Power.        DECREE  OF  NICOLAS   II.  653 

and  even  before  that  event  had  investigated,  as  supreme 
chief,  some  accusations  preferred  against  the  pope  Leo  III. 
No  vacancy  of  the  papacy  took  place  after  Charlemagne 
became  emperor ;  and  it  mast  be  confessed  that,  in  the  first 
which  happened  under  Louis  the  Debonair,  Stephen  IV.  was 
consecrated  in  haste  without  that  prince's  approbation.1  "But 
Gregory  IV.,  his  successor,  waited  till  his  election  had  been 
confirmed ;  and  upon  the  whole  the  Carlovingian  emperors, 
though  less  uniformly  than  their  predecessors,  retained  thai 
mark  of  sovereignty.2  But  during  the  disorderly  state  of 
Italy  which  followed  the  last  reigns  of  Charlemagne's  pos- 
terity, while  the  sovereignty  and  even  the  name  of  an 
emperor  were  in  abeyance,  the  supreme  dignity  of  Christen- 
dom was  conferred  only  by  the  factious  rabble  of  its  capital. 
Otho  the  Great,  in  receiving  the  imperial  crown,  took  upon 
him  the  prerogatives  of  Charlemagne.  There  is  even  extant 
a  decree  of  Leo  VIII.,  which  grants  to  him  and  his  successors 
the  right  of  naming  future  popes.  But  the  authenticity  of 
this  instrument  is  denied  by  the  Italians.3  It  does  not  appear 
that  the  Saxon  emperors  went  to  such  a  length  as  nomination, 
except  in  one  instance  (that  of  Gregory  V.  in  996)  ;  but 
they  sometimes,  not  uniformly,  confirmed  the  election  of  a 
pope,  according  to  ancient  custom.  An  explicit  right  of 
nomination,  was,  however,  conceded  to  the  emperor  Henry 
III.  in  1047,  as  the  only  means  of  rescuing  the  Roman 
church  from  the  disgrace  and  depravity  into  which  it  had 
fallen.  Henry  appointed  two  or  three  very  good  popes  ; 
acting  in  this  against  the  warnings  of  a  selfish  policy,  as  fatal 
experience  soon  proved  to  his  family.4 

This  high  prerogative  was  perhaps  not  designed  to  extend 
beyond  Henry  himself.  But  even  if  it  had  been  transmis>il>lc 
to  his  successors,  the  infancy  of  his  son  Henry  IV.,  and  the 
factions  of  that  minority,  precluded  the  possibility  of  its  exer- 
cise. Nicolas  II.,  in  1059,  published  a  decree  which  restored 
the  right  of  election  to  the  Romans,  but  with  a  Decree  of 
remarkable  variation  from  the  original  form.     The  Nicola*  n 

i  Muratori,  a.d.  817  ;  St.  Marc.  and  Muratori,  Annali  d'  Italia,  a.d.  9G2, 

2  Le  Blanc;    Schmidt,    t.   ii.    p.    186;  speaks  of   it   as   a  gross   imposture,   it 

St.  Marc,  t.  i.  p.  387,  393,  &c.  which  he  probably  goes  too  far.     It  cL 

*  St.    Marc  has  defended   the  a u then-  taiued   credit   rather  early,   and   is   a«i 

ticity  of  this  instrument  in   a  separate  mitted   into  the    Decretum    of   Q  rattan 

dissertation,   t.  iv.  p.  1167,  though   ad-  notwithstanding  its  obvious    teudency 

mitting  some   interpolations.      Pagi.  in  p.  211,  edit.  1591. 

Baronium,  t.  iv.  p.  8,  seemed  to  me  to  *  St.  Marc  ;  Muratori ;  Schmidt ;  Stru 

have    urged    some    weighty    objections:  vius. 


0.54  DIFFERENCES   OF   GREGORY    VH.      Chap,  vn   Part  I 

cardinal  bishops  (seven  in  number,  holding  sees  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Rome,  and  consequently  suffragans  of  the 
pope  as  patriarch  or  metropolitan)  were  to  choose  the  su- 
preme pontiff,  with  the  concurrence  first  of  the  cardinal 
priests  and  deacon-  (or  ministers  of  the  parish  churches  of 
Rome),  and  afterwards  of  the  laity.  Thus  elected,  the  new 
pope  was  to  be  presented  for  confirmation  to  Henry,  "now 
king,  and  hereafter  to  become  emperor,"  and  to  such  of  his 
successors  as  should  personally  obtain  that  privilege.1  This 
decree  is  the  foundation  of  that  celebrated  mode  of  election 
in  a  conclave  of  cardinals  which  has  ever  since  determined 
the  headship  of  the  church.  It  was  intended  not  only  to 
exclude  the  citizens,  who  had  indeed  justly  forfeited  their 
primitive  right,  but  as  far  as  possible  to  prepare  the  way  for 
an  absolute  emancipation  of  the  papacy  from  the  imperial 
control ;  reserving  only  a  precarious  and  personal  concession 
to  the  emperors  instead  of  their  ancient  legal  prerogative 
of  confirmation. 

The  real  author  of  this  decree,  and  of  all  other  vigorous 
Gregory  vn.  measures  adopted  by  fhe  popes  of  that  age,  whether 
a.d.  10/3.  for  t]ie  assertion  of  their  independence  or  the 
restoration  of  discipline,  was  Hildebrand,  archdeacon  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  by  far  the  most  conspicuous  person  of  the 
eleventh  century.  Acquiring  by  his  extraordinary  qualities 
an  unbounded  ascendency  over  the  Italian  clergy,  they  re- 
garded him  as  their  chosen  leader  and  the  hope  of  their 
common  cause.  He  had  been  empowered  singly  to  nominate 
a  pope  on  the  part  of  the  Roman-  after  the  death  of  Leo  IX., 
and  compelled  Henry  III.  to  acquiesce  in  his  choice  of  Victor 
II.2  No  man  could  proceed  more  fearlessly  towards  his 
object  than  Hildebrand,  nor  with  less  attention  to  conscien- 
tious impediments.  Though  the  decree  of  Nicolas  II.,  his 
own  work,  had  expressly  reserved  the  right  of  confirmation 
of  the  young  king  of  Germany,  yet  on  the  death  of  that  pope 
Hildebrand  procured  the  election  and  consecration  of  Alex- 
ander II.  without  waiting  for  any  authority.3  During  this 
pontificate  he  was  considered  as  something  greater  than  the 
pope,  who  acted  entirely  by  his  counsels.  On  Alexander's 
decease  Hildebrand,  long  since  the  real  head  of  the  church, 

i  St.  Marc,   t.   iii.    p.   276.     The    first    necessary  for  a  pope's«election.     Labbe, 
canon  of  the  third  Lateral)  council  makes     Concilia,  t.  x.  p.  1508- 
the  consent  of  two  thirds  of  the  college        2  St.  Marc,  p.  97. 

a  Id.  p.  306. 


Kccles.  Power.  WITH   HENRY   IY.  655 

was  raised  with  enthusiasm  to  its  chief  dignity,  and  assumed 
the  name  of  Gregory  VII. 

Notwithstanding  the  late  precedent  at  the  election  of  Alex- 
ander II.,  it  appears  that  Gregory  did  not  yet  ffis  differ. 
consider  his  plans  sufficiently  mature  to  throw  off  ences  with 
the  yoke  altogether,  but  declined  to  receive  conse-  enry 
(•ration  until  he  had  obtained  the  consent  of  the  king  of 
Germany.1  This  moderation  was  not  of  long  continuance. 
The  situation  of  Germany  speedily  afforded  him  an  opportu- 
nity of  displaying  his  ambitious  views.  Henry  IV.,  through 
a  very  bad  education,  was  arbitrary  and  dissolute ;  the 
Saxons  were  engaged  in  a  desperate  rebellion  ;  and  secret 
disaffection  had  spread  among  the  princes  to  an  extent  of 
which  the  pope  was  much  better  aware  than  the  king.2  He 
began  by  excommunicating  some  of  Henry's  ministers  on 
pretence  of  simony,  and  made  it  a  ground  of  remonstrance 
that  they  were  not  instantly  dismissed.  His  next  step  was  to 
publish  a  decree,  or  rather  to  renew  one  of  Alexander  II., 
against  lay  investitures.3  The  abolition  of  these  was  a  fa- 
vorite object  of  Gregory,  and  formed  an  essential  part  of  his 
general  scheme  for  emancipating  the  spiritual  and  subjugating 
the  temporal  power.  The  ring  and  crosier,  it  was  asserted 
by  the  papal  advocates,  were  the  emblems  of  that  power 
which  no  monarch  could  bestow ;  but  even  if  a  less  offensive 
symbol  were  adopted  in  investitures,  the  dignity  of  the  church 
was  lowered,  and  her  purity  contaminated,  when  her  highest 
ministers  were  compelled  to  solicit  the  patronage  or  the 
approbation  of  laymen.  Though  the  estates  of  bishops 
might,  strictly,  be  of  temporal  right,  yet,  as  they  had  been 
inseparably  annexed  to  their  spiritual  office,  it  became  just 
that  what  was  first  in  dignity  and  importance  should  carry 
with  it  those  accessory  parts.  And  this  was  more  necessary 
than  in  former  times  on  account  of  the  notorious  traffic  which 
sovereigns  made  of  their  usurped  nomination  to  benefices,  so 
that  scarcely  any  prelate  sat  by  their  favor  whose  possession 
was  not  invalidated  by  simony. 

The  contest  about  investitures,  though  begun  by  Gregory 
VII.,  did  not  occupy  a  very  prominent    place  during  his  pon 
lificate  ;  its  interest  being  suspended  by  other  more  extraordi- 

l  St.  Marc,  p.  552.    He  acted,  however,  *  Schmidt;    St.  Marc.     These  two  *ra 

us  pope,  corresponding  in  that  character  my  principal  authorities  for  the  contest 

with  bishops  of  all  countries,  from    the  between  the  church  and  the  empire 

lay  of  his  election,     p.  554.  3  St.  Marc,  t.  iii.  p.  670. 


f,56  DIFFERENCES   OF  GREGORY    VII       Chap.  VII.  Part  i 

nary  and  important  dissensions  between  the  church  and  em- 
pire. The  pope,  after  tampering  some  time  with  the  dis- 
affected party  in  Germany,  summoned  Henry  to  appear  a; 
Rome  and  vindicate  himself  from  the  charges  alleged  by  his 
subjects.  Such  an  outrage  naturally  exasperated  a  young 
and  passionate  monarch.  Assembling  a  number  of  bishops 
and  other  vassals  at  Worms,  he  procured  a  sentence  that 
Gregory  should  no  longer  be  obeyed  as  lawful  pope.  But 
the  time  was  past  for  those  arbitrary  encroachments,  or  at 
least  high  prerogatives,  of  former  emperors.  The  relations 
of  dependency  between  church  and  state  were  now  about  to 
be  reversed.  Gregory  had  no  sooner  received  accounts  of 
the  proceedings  at  Worm-  than  he  summoned  a  council  in 
the  Lateran  palace,  and  by  a  solemn  sentence  not  only  ex 
communicated  Henry,  but  deprived  him  of  the  kingdoms  of 
Germany  and  Italy,  relea-ing  his  subjects  from  their  alle- 
giance, and  forbidding  them  to  obey  him  as  sovereign.  Thus 
Gregory  VII.  obtained  the  glory  of  leaving  all  his  predeces- 
sors behind,  and  astonishing  mankind  by  an  act  of  audacity 
and  ambition  which  the  most  emulous  of  his  successors  could 
hardly  surpass.1 

The  first  impulses  of  Henry's  mind  on  hearing  this  denun- 
ciation were  indignation  and  resentment.  But,  like  other  in- 
experienced and  misguided  sovereigns,  he  had  formed  an 
erroneous  calculation  of  his  own  resources.  A  conspiracy, 
long  prepared,  of  which  the  dukes  of  Suabia  and  Carinthia 
were  the  chiefs,  began  to  manifest  itself.     Some  were  alien - 

1  The  sentence  of  Gregory  VII.  against  deponere    posse     deuegabit,    quicunqu« 

the    emperor    Henry   was    directed,   we  decreta  sanctissimi   papas   Gregorii    nor. 

should  always  remember,  to  persons  al-  proscribenda   judicabit.     Ipse  enim   vi> 

ready  well  disposed  to  reject  his  autbor-  apostolic  us    ....    Prgeterea,  liberi  ho 

ity.     Men  are  glad  to  be  told  that  it  is  mines  Henricum  eo  pacto  sibi  praeposue 

their  duty  to  resist  a  sovereign  against  runt  in  regeui,   ut  electores  suos  justi 

whom  they  are  in  rebellion,  and  will  not  judicare  et  regal!  provideutia  guberuart 

be  very  scrupulous  in  examining  conclu-  satageret,  quod  pactum  ille  postea  prae- 

sions  which  fall  in  with  their  inclinations  varicari  et  contemnere  nou  cessavit,  &c. 

and   interests.     Allegiance  was  in  those  Ergo,  et  absque  sedis  apostolicae  judicio 

turbulent  ages  easily  thrown  off,  and  the  principes  eum   pro  rege  merito  refutare 

right  of  resistance  was  in  continual  exer-  possent,  cum  pactum  adimplere  contemp- 

cise.     To   the   Germans  of  the  eleventh  serit,  quod  iis  pro  electione  su     promi- 

century    a    prince    unfit    for    Christian  serat;    quo  non  adimpleto,  nee  rex  esse 

communion  would  easily  appear  unfit  to  poterat.     Vita   Greg.  VII.   in   Muratori, 

reign  over  them  ;  and  though  Henry  had  Script.  Rer.  Ital.  t.  iii.  p.  342. 

not  given  much  real  provocation  to  the  Upon  the  other  hand,  the  friends  and 

pope,  his  vices  and  tyranny  might  seem  supporters  of  Henry. though  ecclesiastics. 

to  challenge   any   spiritual    censure    or  protested  against    this  novel  stretch  of 

temporal   chastisement.     A   nearly  con-  prerogative  in   the  Roman  see.     Severa. 

temporary  writer  combines  the  two  jus-  proofs  of  this  are  adduced  by  Schmidt, 

tifications  of  the  rebellious  party.    Nemo  t.  iii.  y.  315. 
llomanorum   pootificem    reges    a    ie^no 


Eccus.  Power.  WITH    HENRY    [V.  057 

ated  by  his  vices,  and  others  jealous  of  his  family.  The  re- 
bellious  Saxons  took  courage;  the  bishops,  intimidated  by  ex- 
communications, withdrew  from  his  side ;  and  lie  suddenly 
found  himself  almost  insulated  in  the  midst  of  his  dominions. 
In  this  desertion  he  had  recourse,  through  panic,  to  a  miser- 
able expedient.  He  crossed  the  Alps  with  the  avowed  de- 
termination of  submitting,  and  seeking  absolution  from  the 
pope.  Gregory  was  at  Canossa,  a  fortress  near  Reggio,  be- 
longing to  his  faithful  adherent  the  countess  Matilda.  It  was 
in  a  winter  of  unusual  severity.  The  emperor  .„_ 
was  admitted,  without  his  guards,  into  an  outer  A 
court  of  the  castle,  and  three  successive  days  remained  from 
morning  till  evening  in  a  woollen  shirt  and  with  naked  feet ; 
while  Gregory,  shut  up  with  the  countess,  refused  to  admit 
him  to  his  presence.  On  the  fourth  day  he  obtained  absolu- 
tion ;  but  only  upon  condition  of  appearing  on  a  certain  day 
to  learn  the  pope's  decision  whether  or  no  he  should  be  re 
stored  to  his  kingdom,  until  which  time  he  promised  not  to 
assume  the  ensigns  of  royalty. 

This  base  humiliation,  instead  of  conciliating  Henry's  ad- 
versaries, forfeited  the  attachment  of  his  friends.  In  his  con- 
test with  the  pope  he  had  found  a  zealous  support  in  the  prin- 
cipal Lombard  cities,  among  whom  the  married  and  simonia- 
cal  clergy  had  great  influence.1  Indignant  at  his  submission 
to  Gregory,  whom  they  affected  to  consider  as  an  usurper  of 
the  papal  chair,  they  now  closed  their  gates  against  the  em- 
peror, and  spoke  openly  of  deposing  him.  In  this  singular  po- 
sition between  opposite  dangers,  Henry  retrod  his  late  steps, 
and  broke  off  his  treaty  with  the  pope  ;  preferring,  if  he  must 
fall,  to  fall  as  the  defender  rather  than  the  betrayer  of  his  im- 
perial rights.  The  rebellious  princes  of  Germany  chose  an- 
other king,  Rodolph  duke  of  Suabia,  on  whom  Gregory,  after 
ome  delay,  bestowed  the  crown,  with  a  Latin  verse  import- 
ng  that  it  was  given  by  virtue  of  the  original    commission 

i  There  had  been  a  kind  of  civil  war  Marc,  t.  iii.   p.  230,  &c,  and  in  Mure- 

at  Milan  for  about  tvrsnty  years  before  tori's  Annals.     The   Milanese  clergy    Bet 

this    time,  excited   by    the    intemperate  up  a  pretence  to  retain  wives,  under  the 

zeal  of  some  partisans   who   endeavored  authority  of  their  great  archbishop.  St. 

to    execute    the    papal    decrees   against  Ambrose,  who,  it  seems,  has  spoken  with 

irregular  clerks  by  force.     The  history  of  more  Indulgence   of  this    practice   than 

these  feuds  has  been  written  by  two  con-  most  of  the  fathers.     Both   Arnulf  and 

temporaries,  Arnulf  and   Landulf,  pub-  Landulf  favor  the  married   clerks;   and 

lished  in  the  4tb  volume  of  Mnratori's  were  perhaps  themselves  of  that  descrip. 

Scriptores  Rerum     halicarum ;  sufficient  Hon.     Muratori. 
extracts  from  which  will  he  found  in  St.. 

VOL.  I .  —  M.  42 


658  DISPUTE  ABOUT   [NVESTITURES.     Chat.  VII.  Part  I 

of  St.  Petri-.1  But  the  success  of  this  pontiff  in  his  imme- 
diate designs  was  not  answerahle  to  his  intrepidity.  Henry 
both  subdued  the  German  rebellion  and  carried  on  the  war 
with  so  much  vigor,  or  rather  so  little  resistance  in,  Italy 
that  he  was  crowned  in  Rome  by  the  antipope  Guiber* 
whom  he  had  raised  in  a  council  of  his  partisans  to  the  gov 
ernment  of  the  church  instead  of  Gregory.  The  latter  found 
an  asylum  under  the  protection  of  Roger  Guiscard,  at  Sa- 
Dispute  lerno,  where  he  died  an  exile.     His  mantle,  how- 

about  in-  ever,  descended  upon  his  successors,  especially 
vestitm-es.  Urban  j£m  and  Paschal  II.,  who  strenuously  per- 
severed in  the  great  contest  for  ecclesiastical  independence  ; 
the  former  with  a  spirit  and  policy  worthy  of  Gregory  VII., 
the  latter  with  steady  but  disinterested  prejudice.2  They 
raised  up  enemies  against  Henry  IV.  out  of  the  bosom  of  his 
family,  instigating  the  ambition  of  two  of  his  sons  successive- 
ly, Conrad  and  Henry,  to  mingle  in  the  revolts  of  German}'. 
But  Rome,  under  whose  auspices  the  latter  had  not  scrupled 
to  engage  in  an  almost  parricidal  rebellion,  was  soon  disap- 
pointed by  his  unexpected  tenaciousness  of  that  obnoxious 
prerogative  which  had  occasioned  so  much  of  his  father's 
misery.  He  steadily  refused  to  part  with  the  right  of  inves- 
titure ;  and  the  empire  was  still  committed  in  open  hostility 
with  the  church  for  fifteen  years  of  his  reign.  But  Henry 
V.  being  stronger  in  the  support  of  his  German  vassals  than 
his  father  had  been,  none  of  the  popes  with  whom  he  was 
engaged  had  the  boldness  to  repeat  the  measures  of  Gregory 
compro-  VII.  At  length,  each  party  grown  weary  of  this 
misedby        ruinous  contention,  a  treaty   was   agreed  upon  be- 

concordat  .    n    i«     *         tt         i  •    1  x 

of  caiixtus,  tween  the  emperor  and  Cahxtus  II.  which  put  an 
a.d.  1122.  en(j  ^  compromise  to  the  question  of  ecclesiastical 
investitures.  By  this  compact  the  emperor  resigned  forever 
all  pretence  to  invest  bishops  by  the  ring  and  crosier,  and 

i  Petra  dedit    Petro,   Petrus  diadema  as  may  be  imagined,  was  not  very  satis 

Rodolpho.  factory  to  the  cardinals  and  bishops  abou« 

-  Paschal  II.  was  so  conscientious  in  Paschal's    court,    more    worldly-minded 

his   ahhorrence  of  investitures,  that  he  than  himself,  nor  to  those  of  the  empe 

actually     signed     an     agreement     with  ror's  party,  whose  joint  clamor  soon  put  & 

Henry  V.  in  1110,  whereby  the  prelates  stop  to  the  treaty.    St.  Marc.  t.  iv.  p.  976 

were  to  resign  all  the  lands  and  other  A  letter  of  Paschal  to  Anselm  (Schmidt, 

possessions  which  they  held  in  fief  of  the  t.  iii.  p.  304)   seems    to   imply    that   lit 

emperor,  on  condition  of  the  latter  re-  thought  it  better  for  the  church  to  b« 

nouueing  the  right  of  investiture,  which  without   riches  than   to  enjoy   them   on 

Indeed, in  such  circumstances,  would  fall  condition  of  doing   .omage  to  laymen. 
of  itself     This  nxtraordinary  concessi  m. 


Eccles.  Power.      COMPROMISED  BY  CONCORDAT.  (559 

recognized  the  liberty  of  elections.  But  in  return  it  was 
agreed  that  elections  should  be  made  in  his  presence  or  that 
of  his  officers,  and  that  the  new  bishop  should  receive  his 
temporalities  from  the  emperor  by  the  sceptre.1 

Both  parties  in   the  concordat  at  Worms  receded  from  so 
much  of  their  pretensions,  that  we   might  almost  hesitate  to 
determine  which  is  to  be  considered   as   victorious.     On   the 
one  hand,  in  restoring  the  freedom  of  episcopal  elections  the 
emperors  lost  a  prerogative  of  very  long  standing,  and  almost 
necessary  to  the  maintenance  of  authority  over  not  the  least 
turbulent  part  of  their  subjects.     And  though  the  form  of  in- 
vestiture by  the  ring  and  crosier   seemed  in   itself  of  no  im- 
portance,   yet   it    had    been    in    effect    a    collateral    security 
against  the  election  of  obnoxious  persons.     For  the  emperors 
detaining  this   necessary   part  of  the   pontificals  until    they 
should  confer  investiture,  prevented  a  hasty  consecration  of 
the  new  bishop,  after  which,  the  vacancy  being  legally  filled, 
it  would  not.  be  decent  for  them   to  withhold  the  temporali- 
ties.    But  then,  on   the   other   hand,  they  preserved  by  the 
concordat  their  feudal   sovereignty  over  the   estates  of  the 
church,  in  defiance  of  the   language  which  had  recently  been 
held  by  its  rulers.     Gregory  VII.  had  positively  declared,  in 
the  Lateran  council  of  1080,  that  a  bishop  or  abbot  receiving 
investiture  from  a  layman    should  not  be  reckoned  as  a  prel- 
ate.2    The   same   doctrine  had   been  maintained   by  all  his 
successors,   without  any   limitation   of  their  censures  to   the 
formality  of  the  ring  and  crosier.     But  Calixtus  II.  himself 
had  gone  much   further,  and  absolutely  prohibited  the  com- 
pelling ecclesiastics  to  render  any   service  to  laymen  on  ac- 
count of  their  benefices.8     It  is   evident  that  such  a  general 
immunity  from  feudal  obligations  for  an  order  who  possessed 
nearly  half  the  lands  in  Europe  struck  at  the  root  of  those  in- 
stitutions by  which  the  fabric  of  society  was  principally  held 
together.     This  complete  independency  had  been  the  aim  of 
Gregory's  disciples  ;  and  by  yielding  to  the   continuance  of 
lay  investitures    in  any  shape  Calixtus  may,  in  this  point  of 

1  St.  Marc,  t.  iv.  p.  1093;  Schmidt,  between  those  of  impure  laymen,  p.  956. 
t.  iii.  p.  178.  The  latter  quotes  the  Latin  The  same  expressions  are  used  by  others, 
TOrds.  and  are  levelled    at    the  form   of   feu, la] 

2  St.  Marc.  t.  iv.  p  774.  A  bishop  of  homage,  which,  according  to  the  prin- 
Placentia  asserts  that  prelates  dishonored  eiples  of  that  age,  ought  to  have  boon  at 
their    order    by    putting    their    hands,  •  obnoxious  as  investiture. 

which  held  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,        8  hi.  p.  1Q61,  1067. 


$00  TXYESTTTUEES.  Chat\  VII.  Paut  I 

view,  appear   to   have   relinquished   the   principal   object  of 
contention.1 

The  emperors  were  not  the  only  sovereigns  whose  practice 
of  investiture  excited  the  hostility  of  Rome,  although  they 
sustained  the  principal  brunt  of  the  war.  A  similar  contest 
broke  out  under  the  pontificate  of  Paschal  II.  with  Henry  I. 
of  England ;  for  the  circumstances  of  which,  as  they  contain 
nothing  peculiar,  I  refer  to  our  own  historians.  It  is  remark- 
able that  it  ended  in  a  compromise  not  unlike  that  adjusted 
at  Worms ;  the  king  renouncing  all  sorts  of  investitures, 
while  the  pope  consented  that  the  bishop  should  do  homage 
for  his  temporalities.  This  was  exactly  the  custom  of  France, 
where  an  investiture  by  the  ring  and  crosier  is  said  not  to 
have  prevailed ;  '2  and  it  answered  the  main  end  of  sovereigns 
by  keeping  up  the  feudal  dependency  of  ecclesiastical  estates. 
But  the  kings  of  Castile  were  more  fortunate  than  the  rest ; 
discreetly  yielding  to  the  pride  of  Rome,  they  obtained  what 
was  essential  to  their  own  authority,  and  have  always  pos- 
sessed, by  the  concession  of  Urban  II.,  an  absolute  privilege 

i  Ranke    observes    that    according    to  though  she  seemed  to  come  out  success 

the   concordat   of  Worms    predominant  fully,  yet  it  produced  a  hatred  on  the 

influence  was  yielded  to  the  emperor  in  part  of  the  laity,  and,  above  all,  a  deter- 

Gerinany  and  to  the  pope  in  Italy;  an  mination   in  the  princes  and  nobility  to 

agreement,  however,  which  was  not  ex-  grant  no  more   lands   over  which   their 

pressed  with  precision,  and  which  con-  suzerainty  was  to  be  disputed,     hi.  269. 

tained  the  germ  of  fresh  disputes.     Hist.  The  emperors  retained  a  good  deal  —  the 

of  Reform,  i.  34      But  even  if  this  victory  regale,  or  possession  of  the  temporalities 

6hould  be  assigned  to  Rome  in  respect  of  during  a  vacancy;  the  prerogative,  on  a 

Germany,  it  does  not  seem  equally  clear  disputed  election,  of  investing  whichever 

as   to  England.      Lingard    says    of   the  candidate  they  pleased;  above  all,  per- 

agreement  between  Henry  I.  and    Pas-  haps,  the  recognition  of  a  great  principle, 

coal  II.,  —  "Upon  the  whole,  the  church-  that  the  church  was.  as  to  its  temporal 

gained   little   by   this    compromise.      It  estate,  the  subject  of  the  civil  magistrate 

might  check,  but   did   not  abolish,  the  The   feudal   element  of   society    was   so 

principal  abuse.     If  Henry  surrendered  opposite  to  the  ecclesiastical,  that  what- 

an    unnecessary   ceremony,   he  still  re-  ever  was  gained  by   the  former  was  so 

tained  the  substance.     The  right  which  much  subtracted  from  the  efficacy  of  the 

he  assumed  of  nominating  bishops  and  latter.     This  left  an  importance  to  the 

abbots  was  left   unimpaired."     Hist,  of  imperial   investiture  after   the    Calixtin 

Etsgl.  ii.  169.     But  if  this  nomination  by  concordat,  which  was  not  intended  pro- 

the  crown  was  so  great  an  abuse,  why  bably  by  the   pope.     For   the  words,  aa 

did   the   popes  concede  it  to  Spain  and  quoted  by  Schmidt   (iii.  301),  —  Habeat 

1'rance  ?    The  real  truth  is,  that  no  mode  imperatoria  dignitas  electum  liber  ,  con- 

of  choosing  bishops  is  altogether  unex-  secra turn  canonice,regaliter  per  sceptrum 

ceptionable.       But,     upon     the     whole,  sine  pretio  tamen  investire  solenniter  — 

nomination    by  the   crown   is   likely   to  imply  nothing  more  than  a   formality. 

W^rk  better  than  any  other,  even  for  the  The  emperor  is,  as  it  were,  commanded 

religious  good    of   the    churoh.      As    a  to  invest  the  bishop  after  consecration, 

means  of  preserving  the  connection  of  the  But    in    practice    the   emperors    alwayi 

clergy  with  the  state,  it  is  almost  iudis-  conferred   the   investiture  before   conse 

pensable.  oration.     Schmidt,  iv.  153 

Schmidt  observes,  as  to  Germany,  that  2  Histoire   du   Droit   public    eoclesias- 

the  dispute  about  investitures  was  not  ■  tique  Francois,  p.  261.     I  do  not  fullj 

#holly  to  the  advantage  of  the  church  ;  rely  on  this  authority. 


Eccles.  Power.         CAPITULAR   ELECTIONS.  661 

of  nomination  to  bishoprics  in  their  dominions.1  An  early 
evidence  of  that  indifference  of  the  popes  towards  the  real 
independence  of  national  churches  to  which  subsequent  ages 
were  to  lend  abundant  confirmation. 

When  the  emperors  had  surrendered  their  pretensions  to 
interfere  in  episcopal  elections,  the  primitive  mode  Introduction 
of  collecting  the  suffrages  of  clergy  and  laity  in  of  capitular 
conjunction,  or  at  least  of  the  clergy  with  theeecl0ns* 
laity's  assent  and  ratification,  ought  naturally  to  have  revived. 
But  in  the  twelfth  century  neither  the  people,  nor  even  the 
general  body  of  the  diocesan  clergy,  were  considered  as 
worthy  to  exercise  this  function.  It  soon  devolved  altogether 
upon  the  chapters  of  cathedral  churches.2  The  original  of 
these  may  be  traced  very  high.  In  the  earliest  ages  we  find 
a  college  of  presbytery  consisting  of  the  priests  and  deacons, 
assistants  as  a  council  of  advice,  or  even  a  kind  of  parliament, 
to  their  bishops.  Parochial  divisions,  and  fixed  ministers 
attached  to  them,  were  not  established  till  a  later  period. 
But  the  canons,  or  cathedral  clergy,  acquired  afterwards  a 
more  distinct  character.  They  were  subjected  by  degrees 
to  certain  strict  observances,  little  differing,  in  fact,  from 
those  imposed  on  monastic  orders.  They  lived  at  a  common 
table,  they  slept  in  a  common  dormitory,  their  dress  and  diet 
were  regulated  by  peculiar  laws.  But  they  were  distin- 
guished from  monks  by  the  right  of  possessing  individual 
property,  which  was  afterwards  extended  to  the  enjoyment 
of  separate  prebends  or  benefices.  These  strict  regulations, 
chiefly  imposed  by  Louis  the  Debonair,  went  into  disuse 
through  the  relaxation  of  discipline ;  nor  were  they  ever 
effectually  restored.  Meantime  the  chapters  became  ex- 
tremely rich ;  and  as  they  monopolized  the  privilege  of 
electing  bishops,  it  became  an  object  of  ambition  with  noble 

1  F.  Paul  on  Benefices,  c.  24 ;  Zurita,  though  perhaps  little  else  than  a  matter 
Anales  de  Aragon,  t.  iv.  p.  305.  Fleury  of  form.  Innocent  II.  seems  to  have 
says  that  the  kiugs  of  Spain  nominate  to  been  the  first  who  declared  that  whoever 
bishoprics  by  virtue  of  a  particular  indul-  had  the  majority  of  the  chapter  in  his 
gence,  renewed  by  the  pope  for  the  life  favor  should  be  deemed  duly  elected; 
of  each  prince.  Institutions  au  Droit,  and  this  was  confirmed  by  Otho  IV.  in 
t.  i.  p.  106.  the  capitulation  upon  his  accession.  Hist. 

2  Fra  Paolo  (Treatise  on  Benefices,  c.  des  Allemands,  t.  iv.  p.  175.  Fleury 
24)  says  that  between  1122  and  114".  thinks  that  chapters  had  not  an  exclusive 
it  became  a  rule  almost  everywhere  election  till  the  end  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
established  that  bishops  should  be  chos-  tury.  The  second  Lateral]  council  in 
en  by  the  chapter.  Schmidt,  however.  1139  represses  their  attempts  to  engrosi 
brings  a  few  instances  where  the  consent  it.  Institutions  au  Droit  fc>cl<';s.  t.  i 
»f  the  nobility  and  other  laics  isexpre^seil.  p.  100. 


662  GENERAL   CONDUCT       Chap.  VII.  Part  i 

families  to  obtain  eanonries  for  their  younger  children,  as  the 
surest  road  to  ecclesiastical  honors  and  opulence.  Contrary, 
therefore,  to  the  general  policy  of  the  church,  persons  of 
inferior  birth  have  been  rigidly  excluded  from  these  founda- 
tions1 

The  object  of  Gregory  VII.,  in  attempting  to  redress  those 
General  more  flagrant  abuses  which  for  two  centuries  had 

conduct  of  deformed  the  face  of  the  Latin  church,  is  not 
regcry  vn.  i11(.ap.lTJ]e?  perhaps,  of  vindication,  though  no  suf- 
ficient apology  can  be  offered  for  the  means  he  employed. 
But  the  disinterested  love  of  reformation,  to  which  candor 
might  ascribe  the  contention  against  investitures,  is  belied  by 
the  general  tenor  of  his  conduct,  exhibiting  an  arrogance 
without  parallel,  and  an  ambition  that  grasped  at  universal 
and  unlimited  monarchy.  He  may  be  called  the  common 
enemy  of  all  sovereigns  whose  dignity  as  well  as  independence 
mortified  his  infatuated  pride.  Thus  we  find  him  menacing 
Philip  I.  of  France,  who  had  connived  at  the  pillage  of  some 
Italian  merchants  and  pilgrims,  not  only  with  an  interdict, 
but  a  sentence  of  deposition.2  Thus  too  he  asserts,  as  a 
known  historical  fact,  that  the  kingdom  of  Spain  had  formerly 
belonged,  by  special  right,  to  St.  Peter ;  and  by  virtue  of  this 
imprescriptible  claim  he  grants  to  a  certain  count  de  Rouci 
all  territories  which  he  should  reconquer  from  the  Moors,  to 
be  held  in  fief  from  the  Holy  See  by  a  stipulated  rent.3  A 
similar  pretension  he  makes  to  the  kingdom  of  Hungary,  and 
bitterly  reproaches  its  sovereign,  Solomon,  who  had  done  hom- 
age to  the  emperor,  in  derogation  of  St.  Peter,  his  legitimate 
lord.4     It  was  convenient  to  treat  this  apostle  as  a  great 

1  Schmidt,   t.  ii.    p.  224,  473;     t.   iii.  Roceio,  cujus  famam  apud  vos  haud  oh 

p.  281.     Encyclopedie  art.  Chanoine.  F.  scuram  esse  putamus,  terram  illam  ad 

Paul  on  Benefices,  c.  16.    Fleury,  8me  Dis-  honorem  Sti.  Petri  ingredi,  et  a  pagano 

cours  sur  l'Hist.  Eccles.  rum  manibus  eripere  cupiens,  banc  con- 

^  -  St.  Marc,  t.  iii.  p.  628;  Fleury,  Hist,  cessioueni  ab  apostolic!  sede  obtinuit,  at 

Eccles.  t.  xiii.  p.  281,  284.  partem  illam.  unde  paganoe  sun    studio 

3  The    language   he  employs   is  worth  et  adjuncto  sibi  aliorum  auxilioexpellere 

uoting  as  a  specimen  of  his  style:  Non  possit,  sub   conditione   inter   nos   factae 

latere  vos   credimus.    regnum    Hispaniae  pactionis  ex  parte  Sti.  Peti.  possideret. 

ab   antiquo  juris  sancti    Petri  fuisse,  et  Labbe,  Concilia,  t.  x.  p.   10.     Three  io- 

adhuc  licet  diu  a  paganis  sit  occupatum,  stances  occur  in  the  Corps  Diplomatique 

lege  tamen  justitiae  non  evacuate,  nulli  of  Dumont,  where  a  duke  of  Dalmath 

mortalium,  sed   soli   apostolicae   sedi   ex  (t.  i.  p.  53),  a  count  of  Provence  (p.  58), 

sequo  pertinere.     Quod  enim  auctore  Deo  and   a   count   of  Barcelona   (ibid.),    put 

semel  in  proprietates   ecclesiarum   juste  them8elye8  under  the  feudal  superiority 

pervenerit,  maneute  Eo,  ab  usu  quidem,  and    protection   of   Gregory  VII.      Thf 

Bed  ali  earum  jure,  occasione  trartsetintis  motive  was  sufficiently  obvious, 

temporis,  siuelegitimaconcessionedivelli  *  St.  Marc,  t-  iii   5    624,674;  Schmidt 

Hon   poterit.     Itaque   comes    Evalus   de  p.  73. 


Rccucs.  Powir.  OF  GREGORY  VH  gg;3 

feudal  suzerain,  and  the  legal  principles  of  that  age  were 
dexterously  applied  to  rivet  more  forcibly  the  fetters  of 
superstition.1 

While  temporal  sovereigns  were  opposing  so  inadequate  a 
.esistance  to  a  system  of  usurpation  contrary  to  all  precedent 
and  to  the  common  principles  of  society,  it  was  not  to  be  ex- 
pected that  national  churches  should  persevere  in  opposing 
pretensions  for  which  several  ages  had  paved  the  way. 
Gregory  VII.  completed  the  destruction  of  their  liberties. 
The  principles  contained  in  the  decretals  of  Isidore,  hostile 
as  they  were  to  ecclesiastical  independence,  were  set  aside 
as  insufficient  to  establish  the  absolute  monarchy  of  Rome. 
By  a  constitution  of  Alexander  II.,  during  whose  pontificate 
Hildebrand  himself  was  deemed  the  effectual  pope,  no  bishop 
in  the  catholic  church  was  permitted  to  exercise  his  functions, 
until  he  had  received  the  confirmation  of  the  Holy  See :  2  a 
provision  of  vast  importance,  through  which,  beyond  perhaps 
any  other  means,  Rome  has  sustained,  and  still  sustains,  her 
temporal  influence,  as  well  as  her  ecclesiastical  supremacy. 
The  national  churches,  long  abridged  of  their  liberties  by 
gradual  encroachments,  now  found  themselves  subject  to  an 
undisguised  and  irresistible  despotism.  Instead  of  affording 
protection  to  bishops  against  their  metropolitans,  under  an 
insidious  pretence  of  which  the  popes  of  the  ninth  century 
had  subverted  the  authority  of  the  latter,  it  became  the 
favorite  policy  of  their  successors  to  harass  all  prelates  with 
citations  to  Rome.3  Gregory  obliged  the  metropolitans  to 
attend  in  person  for  the  pallium.4     Bishops  were  summoned 

even  from  England  and  the  northern  kingdoms  to  receive 

©  © 

the  commands  of  the  spiritual  monarch.  William  the  Con- 
queror having  made  a  difficulty  about  permitting  his  prelates 
to  obey  these  citations,  Gregory,  though  in  general  on  good 
terms  with  that  prince,  and  treating  him  with  a  deference 
which  marks  the  effect  of  a  firm  character  in  repressing  the 
ebullitions  of  overbearing  pride,5  complains  of  this  as  a  per- 
secution unheard  of  among  pagans.6  The  great  quarrel 
between  archbishop  Anselm  and  his  two  sovereigns,  William 


1  The  character  and  policy  of  Gregorv  *  Id.  t.  iv.  p.  170. 

VTL.  are  well  discussed  by  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  6  St.  Marc,  p.  628,  788 ;  Schmidt,  t.  Hi. 

p.  307.  p.  82. 

2  St.  Marc,  p.  460.  •  St.  Hare,  t.  iv.  p.  761 ;  Collier,  p  25? 
»  Schmidt,  t.  iii   p.  80,  322 


664        AUTHORITY  OF  PAPAL  LEGATES.     Chap.  VII.  Part  1 

Rufus  and  Henry  I.,  was  originally  founded  upon  a  similar 
refusal  to  permit  his  departure  for  Rome. 

This  perpetual  control  exercised  by  the  popes  over  eccle- 
Authority  siastical,  and  in  some  degree  over  temporal  affairs, 
of  papal  was  maintained  by  means  of  their  legates,  at  once 

the  ambassadors  and  the  lieutenants  of  the  Holy 
See.  Previously  to  the  latter  part  of  the  tenth  age  these 
had  been  sent  not  frequently  and  upon  special  occasions. 
The  legatine  or  vicarial  commission  had  generally  been  in- 
trusted to  some  eminent  metropolitan  of  the  nation  within 
which  it  was  to  be  exercised;  as  the  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury was  perpetual  legate  in  England.  But  the  special 
commissioners,  or  legates  a  latere,  suspending  the  pope's  ordi- 
nary vicars,  took  upon  themselves  an  unbounded  authority 
over  the  national  churches,  holding  councils,  promulgating 
canons,  deposing  bishops,  and  issuing  interdicts  at  their  dis 
cretion.  They  lived  in  splendor  at  the  expense  of  the  bi.-hops 
of  the  province.  This  was  the  more  galling  to  the  hierarchy, 
because  simple  deacons  were  often  invested  with  this  dignity, 
which  set  them  above  primates.  As  the  sovereigns  of  France 
and  England  acquired  more  courage,  they  considerably 
abridged  this  prerogative  of  the  Holy  See,  and  resisted  the 
entrance  of  any  legates  into  their  dominions  without  their 
consent.1 

From  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.  no  pontiff  thought  of 
awaiting  the  confirmation  of  the  emperor,  as  in  earlier  ages, 
before  he  was  installed  in  the  throne  of  St.  Peter.  On  the. 
contrary,  it  was  pretended  that  the  emperor  was  himself  to 
be  confirmed  by  the  pope.  This  had  indeed  been  broached 
by  John  VIII.  two  hundred  years  before  Gregory.'2  It  was 
still  a  doctrine  not  calculated  for  general  reception ;  but  the 
popes  availed  themselves  of  every  opportunity  which  the 
temporizing  policy,  the  negligence  or  bigotry  of  sovereigns 
threw    into   their   hands.      Lothaire   coming   to   receive   the 

1  DeMarca,  1.  vi.c.28, 30, 31.    Schmidt,  these   words   into  the   mouth  of  Jesu 

t.   ii.   p.  498;   t.  hi.  p.  312,  320.     Hist.  Christ,  as  addressed  to  pope  Victor  11. 

du  Droit  Public  Eccl.  Francois,  p.  250.  Ego    cluves    totius    universalis   ecclesiae 

Fleury,  4'»e  Discours  sur  l'Uist.  Eccles.  mcae  tuis  manibus  tradidi,  et  super  earn 

c.  10.  te  mini  vicarium   posui,  quam   proprii 

-Vide    supra.      It    appears    manifest  sanguinis  effusione  redemi.     Etsipauca. 

that  the  scheme  of  temporal  sovereignty  sunt  ista,  etiam  monarchias  addidi :  im- 

was  only  suspended  by  the  disorders  of  mo  sublato  rege  de  medio  totiu-i  tlomaui 

the  Roman   See  in  the  tentli  century,  imperii     vacantia     tii.i     jura     permifl 

Peter  Damian,  a  celebrated  writer  of  the  Schmidt,  t.  iii.  \>.  7* 
age  of  HUdebrand,  and  his  friend,  puts 


Eccles.  Power.  ADRIAN   IV.  665 

imperial  crown  at  Rome,  this  circumstance  was  commemo- 
rated by  a  picture  in  the  Lateral,  palace,  in  which,  and  in 
two  Latin  verses  subscribed,  he  was  represented  as  doing 
homage  to  the  pope.1  When  Frederic  Barbarossa  came 
upon  the  same  occasion,  he  omitted  to  hold  the  Adriun  1V 
stirrup  of  Adrian  IV.,  who,  in  his  turn,  refused  to 
give  him  the  usual  kiss  of  peace  ;  nor  was  the  contest  ended  but 
by  the  emperor's  acquiescence,  who  was  content  to  follow  the 
precedents  of  his  predecessors.  The  same  Adrian,  expostu- 
lating with  Frederic  upon  some  slight  grievance,  reminded 
him  of  the  imperial  crown  which  he  had  conferred,  and 
declared  his  willingness  to  bestow,  if  possible,  still  greater 
benefits.  But  the  phrase  employed  (majora  beneficia)  sug- 
gested the  idea  of  a  fief;  and  the  general  insolence  which 
pervaded  Adrian's  letter  confirming  this  interpretation,  a 
ferment  arose  among  the  German  princes,  in  a  congress  of 
whom  this  letter  was  delivered.  "  From  whom  then,"  one 
of  the  legates  was  rash  enough  to  say,  "  does  the  emperor  hold 
his  crown,  except  from  the  pope  ?  "  which  so  irritated  a  prince 
of  Wittelsbach,  that  he  was  with  difficulty  prevented  from 
cleaving  the  priest's  head  with  his  sabre.'2  Adrian  IV.  was 
the  only  Englishman  that  ever  sat  in  the  papal  chair.  It 
might,  perhaps,  pass  for  a  favor  bestowed  on  his  natural 
sovereign,  when  he  granted  to  Henry  II.  the  kingdom  of 
Ireland;  yet  the  language  of  this  donation,  wherein  he  as- 
serts all  islands  to  be  the  exclusive  property  of  St.  Peter, 
should  not  have  had  a  very  pleasing  sound  to  an  insular 
monarch. 

I  shall  not  wait  to  comment  on  the  support  given  to  Becket 
by  Alexander  III.,  which  must- be  familiar  to  the  Innocent  nL 
English  reader,  nor  on  his  speedy  canonization ;  a  a.d. 
reward  which  the  church  has  always  held  out  to 
its  most  active  friends,  and  which  may  be  compared  to  titles 
of  nobility  granted  by  a  temporal  sovereign.3  But  the  epoch 
when  the  spirit  of  papal  usurpation  was  most  strikingly  dis- 

*  Rex  venit  ante  fores,  jurans  prius  2  Muratori,  ubi  supra.     Schmidt,  t  iii. 

urbis  honores  :  p.  393. 

Post  homo  fit  papae,  sumit  quo  dante  3  The  first  instance  of  a  solemn  papal 

coronam.  canonization   is   that  of  St.    Udalric   by 

Muratori,  Annali,  a.d.  1157-  John  XVI.  in  993.     However,  the  metro 

There   was   a   pretext   for   this   artful  politans  continued  to  meddle  with  thii 

line.     Lothaire  had   received  the  estate  sort  of  apotheosis  till  the  pontificate  of 

of  Matilda  in  fief  from    the   pope,    with'  Alexander    111.,    who    reserved   it,    as   a 

a  reversion  to  Henry  the  Proud,  his  sou-  choice  prerogative,  to  the  Holy  See.   Ait 

n-law.     Schmidt,  p.  349  de  verifier  les  Dates,  t.  i.  p.  247  and  290 


GOG  EXTRAORDINARY    PRETENSIONS      Chat.  VII.   Part  1 

played  was  the  pontificate  of  Innocent  III.  In  each  of  the 
three  leading  objects  which  Rome  has  pursued,  independent 
sovereignty,  supremacy  over  the  Christian  church,  control 
over  the  princes  of  the  earth,  it  was  the  fortune  of  this  pon- 
tiff to  conquer,  lie  realized,  as  we  have  seen  in  another 
place,  thai  fond  hope  of  so  many  of  his  predecessors,  a  do- 
minion over  Koine  and  the  central  parts  of  Italy.  During 
his  pontificate  Constantinople  was  taken  by  the  Latins ;  and 
however  he  might  seem  to  regret  a  diversion  of  the  crusader.-, 
which  impeded  the  recovery  of  the  Holy  Land,  he  exulted 
in  the  obedience  of  the  new  patriarch  and  the  reunion  of  the 
Greek  church.  Never,  perhaps,  either  before  or  since,  was 
the  great  eastern  schism  in  so  fair  a  way  of  being  healed; 
even  the  kings  of  Bulgaria  and  of  Armenia  acknowledged 
the  supremacy  of  Innocent,  and  permitted  his  interference 
with  their  ecclesiastical  institutions. 

The  maxims  of  Gregory  VII.  were  now  matured  by  more 
ms  extra-  tnai1  a  nu»dred  years,  and  the  right  of  trampling 
ordinary  upon  the  necks  of  kings  had  been  received,  at 
pretensions.  jeagt  gmaa^  churchmen,  as  an  inherent  attri- 
bute of  the  papacy.  "  As  the  sun  and  the  moon  are  placed 
in  the  firmament "  (such  is  the  language  of  Innocent),  "  the 
greater  as  the  light  of  the  day,  and  the  lesser  of  the  night, 
thus  are  there  two  powers  in  the  church  —  the  pontifical, 
which,  as  having  the  charge  of  souls,  is  the  greater ;  and  the 
royal,  which  is  the  less,  and  to  which  the  bodies  of  men  only 
are  intrusted." 1  Intoxicated  with  these  conceptions  (if  we 
may  apply  such  a  word  to  successful  ambition),  he  thought 
no  quarrel  of  princes  beyond  the  sphere  of  his  jurisdiction. 
"Though  I  cannot  judge  of  the  right  to  a  fief,"  said  Innocent 
to  the  kings  of  France  and  England,  "  yet  it  is  my  province 
to  judge  where  sin  is  committed,  and  my  duty  to  prevent  all 
public  scandals."  Philip  Augustus,  who  had  at  that  time  the 
worse  in  his  war  with  Richard,  acquiesced  in  this  sophism  ; 
the  latter  was  more  refractory  till  the  papal  legate  began  to 
menace  him  with  the  rigor  of  the  church.2  But  the  king  of 
England,  as  well  as  his  adversary,  condescended  to  obtain 

i  Vita  Innocentii   Tertii  in  Muratori,  pacem    vel    treugas    cum    rege    Angliae 

Bcriptores  Rerum  Ital.  t.  iii.  pars  i.  p.  448.  initurum.    Richardus  autem  rex  Augliw 

This  Life  is  written  by  a  contemporary,  se  difncilem  ostendebat.     Sed  cum  idem 

St.  Marc,   t.  v.   p.  325.     Schmidt,  t.  iv.  legatus  d  cepit  rigorem  ecclesiastievm  in- 

p.  227.  tentare,  saDiori  ductus consilk) acquiev't 

s  Pbilippus  rex  Francise  in  manu  ejus  Vita  Innocentii  Tertii,    t.    iii.   pars  i.  p 

data  fide  prouiisit  se  ad  mandatum  ip.-iu:s  503. 


Eccles.  Power.  OF  INNOCENT  III.  667 

temporal'}'  ends  by  an  impolitic  submission  to  Rome.  We 
have  a  letter  from  Innocent  to  the  king  of  Navarre,  directing 
him,  on  pain  of  spiritual  censures,  to  restore  some  castles 
which  he  detained  from  Richard.1  And  the  latter  appears 
to  have  entertained  hopes  of  recovering  his  ransom  paid  to 
the  emperor  and  duke  of  Austria  through  the  pope's  inter- 
ference.2 By  such  blind  sacrifices  of  the  greater  to  the  less, 
of  the  future  to  the  present,  the  sovereigns  of  Europe  played 
continually  into  the  hands  of  their  subtle  enemy. 

Though  I  am  not  aware  that  any  pope  before  Innocent 
III.  had  thus  announced  himself  as  the  general  arbiter  of 
difference-  and  conservator  of  the  peace  throughout  Christen- 
dom, yet  the  scheme  had  been  already  formed,  and  the  public 
mind  was  in  .-ome  degree  prepared  to  admit  it.  Gerohus,  a 
writer  who  lived  early  in  the  twelfth  century,  published  a 
theory  of  perpetual  pacification,  as  feasible  certainly  as  some 
that  have  been  planned  in  later  times.  All  disputes  among 
princes  were  to  be  referred  to  the  pope.  If  either  part}  re- 
fused to  obey  the  sentence  of  Rome,  he  was  to  be  excommu- 
nicated and  deposed.  Every  Christian  sovereign  was  to 
attack  the  refractory  delinquent  under  pain  of  a  similar 
forfeiture.3  A  project  of  this  nature  had  not  only  a  magnifi- 
cence flattering  to  the  ambition  of  the  church,  but  was 
calculated  to  impose  upon  benevolent  minds,  sickened  by  the 
cupidity  and  oppression  of  princes.  No  control  but  that  of 
religion  appeared  sufficient  to  restrain  the  abuses  of  society ; 
while  its  salutary  influence  had  already  been  displayed  both 
in  the  Truce  of  God,  which  put  the  first  check  on  the  custom 
of  private  war,  and  more  recently  in  the  protection  afforded 
to  crusaders  against  all  aggression  during  the  continuance 
of  their  eno-asenient.  But  reasonings  from  the  excesses  of 
liberty  in  favor  of  arbitrary  government,  or  from  the  calami- 
ties of  national  wars  in  favor  of  universal  monarchy,  involve 
the  tacit  fallacy,  that  perfect,  or  at  least  superior,  wisdom  and 
virtue  will  be  found  in  the  restraining  power.  The  experi- 
ence of  Europe  was  not  such  as  to  authorize  so  candid  an 
expectation  in  behalf  of  the  Roman  See. 

1  Innoceatii  Opera  (Colonise,  1574),  p  release  from  prison:  though  Eleanoi 
124.  wrote  him  a  letter,  in  which  she  asks. 

2  Id.  p.  134.  Innocent  actually  wrote  "  Has  not  God  given  you  the  power  to 
some  letters  foi  this  purpose,  but  with-  govern  nations  and  kings?  "  Velly,  Hist 
out  any  effect,  nor  was  he  probably  at  all  de  France,  t.  iii.  p.  362. 

Bolicitous  about  it.    p.    139  and  141.    Nor        3  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  232 
bad    he  interfered  to  procure   Richards 


668  EXTRAORDINARY   PRETENSIONS    Chat.  VII.  Part  i 

There  were  certainly  some  instances,  where  the  temporal 
supremacy  of  Innocent  III.,  however  usurped,  may  appear  to 
have  been  exerted  beneficially.  He  directs  one  of  his  legates 
to  compel  the  observance  of  peace  between  the  kings  of"  Cas- 
tile and  Portugal,  if  necessary,  by  excommunication  and 
interdict.1  He  enjoins  the  king  of  Aragon  to  restore  his 
coin,  which  he  had  lately  debased,  and  of  which  great  com- 
plaint had  arisen  in  his  kingdom.-  Nor  do  I  question  his 
sincerity  in  these,  or  in  any  other  eases  of  interference  with 
civil  government.  A  great  mind,  such  as  Innocent  III.  un- 
doubtedly possessed,  though  prone  to  sacrifice  every  other 
object  to  ambition,  can  never  be  indifferent  to  the  beauty  of 
social  order  and  the  happiness  of  mankind.  But,  if  we  may 
judge  by  the  correspondence  of  this  remarkable  person,  his 
foremost  gratification  was  the  display  of  unbounded  power. 
His  letters,  especially  to  ecclesiastics,  are  full  of  unprovoked 
rudeness.  As  impetuous  as  Gregory  VII.,  he  is  unwilling  to 
owe  anything  to  favor ;  he  seems  to  anticipate  denial ;  heats 
himself  into  anger  as  he  proceeds,  and,  where  he  commences 
with  solicitation,  seldom  concludes  without  a  menace.3  An 
extensive  learning  in  ecclesiastical  law,  a  close  observation 
of  whatever  was  passing  in  the  world,  an  unwearied  diligence, 
sustained  his  fearless  ambition.4  With  such  a  temper,  and 
with  such  advantages,  he  was  formidable  beyond  all  his  pre- 
decessors, and  perhaps  beyond  all  his  successors.  On  every 
side  the  thunder  of  Rome  broke  over  the  heads  of  princes. 
A  certain  Swero  is  excommunicated  for  usurping  the  crown 
of  Norway.  A  legate,  in  passing  through  Hungary,  is  de- 
tained by  the  king:  Innocent  writes  in  tolerably  mild  terms 
to  this  potentate,  but  fails  not  to  intimate  that  he  might  be 
compelled  to  prevent  his  son's  accession  to  the  throne.  The 
king  of  Leon  had  married  his  cousin,  a  princess  of  Castile. 

1  Innocent.  Opera,  p.  146.  now  refused  to  accept  it ;  and  directs  them 

2  p.  378.  to  inquire   into   the   facts,   and,  if  they 

3  p.  31,  73.  76,  &c.  &c.  prove  truly  stated,  to  compel  the  creditor 

4  The  following  instance  may  illustrate  by  spiritual  censures  to  restore  the  preni- 
the  character  of  this  pope,  and  his  spirit  ises.  reckoning  their  rent  during  the  time 
of  governing  the  whole  world,  as  much  as  of  his  mortgage  as  part  of  the  debt,  and 
those  of  a  more  public  nature.  He  writes  to  receive  the  remainder.  Id.  t.  ii.  p.  17. 
to  the  chapter  of  Pisa  that  one  Rubens,  It  must  be  admitted  tliat  Innocent  III. 
a  citizen  of  that  place,  had  complained  to  discouraged  in  general  those  vexatiouc 
him,  that,  having  mortgaged  a  house  and  and  dilatory  appeals  from  inferior  eecle- 
garden  for  two  hundred  and  fifty-two  siastical  tribunals  to  the  court  of  Home 
pounds,  on  condition  that  he  might  re-  which  had  gained  ground  before  his  time, 
deem  it  before  a  fixed  day,  within  which  and  especially  in  the  pontificate  of  Alts 
time  he  had  been  unavoidably  prevented  ander  III. 

from  raising  the  money,  the  creditor  had 


Eccles.  Power.  OF   INNOCENT   III.  fiOO 

Innocent  subjects  the  kingdom  to  an  interdict.     When  the 
clergy  of  Leon  petition  him  to  remove  it,  becau-e,  when  (hey 
ceased  to  perform  their  functions,  the  laity  paid  no  tithes,  and 
listened  to  heretical  teachers   when    orthodox    mouths  were 
mute,  he  consented  that  divine  service  with  closed  doors,  but 
not  the  rites  of  burial,  might  be  performed.1     The  king  at 
length  gave  way,  and  sent  back  his  wife.     But  a  more  illus- 
trious victory  of  the   same  kind   was  obtained   over   Philip 
Augustus,  who,  having  repudiated  Isemburga  of  Denmark, 
had  contracted  another  marriage.     The  conduct  of  the  king, 
though  not  without  the  usual  excuse  of  those  times,  nearness  of 
blood,  was  justly  condemned  ;  and  Innocent  did  not  hesitate 
to    visit    his    sins  upon  the   people   by   a  general    interdict. 
This,  after  a  short  demur  from  some  bishops,  was  enforced 
throughout  France ;  the   dead  lay  unburied,  and  the  living 
were  cut  off  from  the  offices  of  religion,  till  Philip,  thus  sub- 
dued, took  back  his  divorced  wife.     The  submission  of  such 
a  prince,  not  feebly  superstitious,  like  his  predecessor  Robert 
nor  vexed  with   seditions,  like  the   emperor   Henry  IV.,  but 
brave,  firm,  and  victorious,  is  perhaps  the  proudest  trophy  in 
the    scutcheon   of   Rome.     Compared  with   this,  the  subse- 
quent  triumph   of   Innocent    over    our    pusillanimous   John 
seems  cheaply  gained,  though  the  surrender  of  a  powerful 
kingdom  into  the  vassalage  of  the  pope  ma}-  strike  us  as  a 
proof  of  stupendous  baseness  on  one  side,  and  audacity  on 
the  other.2     Yet,  under  this  very  pontificate,  it  was  not  un- 
paralleled.    Peter  II.,  king  of  Aragon,  received  at  Rome  the 
belt  of  knighthood  and  the  royal  crown  from  the  hands  of  In- 
nocent III. ;  he  took  an  oath  of  perpetual  fealty  and  obedi- 
ence to  him  and  his  successors  ;  he  surrendered  his  kingdom, 
and  accepted  it  again  to  be  held  by  an  annual  tribute,  in  re- 
turn for  the  protection  of  the  Apostolic  See.3     This  strange 
conversion  of  kingdoms  into  spiritual  fiefs  was  intended  as 
the  price  of  security  from  ambitious  neighbors,  and  may  be 

i  Innocent.  Opera,  t.  ii.  p.  411.     Vita  the    parliament    unanimously    declared 

Tunocentlll.  that  John  had  no  right  to  subject  the 

*  The  stipulated  annual  payment  of  kingdom  to  a  superior  without  their  con- 

1000  marks  was  seldom  made  by  the  kings  sent ;  which  put  an  end  forever  to  the  ap- 

of  England :  but  one  is  almost  ashamed  plications.     Prynne's  Constitutions,  vol. 

that  it  should  ever  have  been  so.     Henry  iii. 

III.  paid  it  occasionally  when  he  had  any  3  Zurita,  Anales  de  Aragon,   t.  i   f  91 

object  to  attain,  and  even  Edward  I.  for  This  was  not  forgotten  towards  the  latter 

some  years  ;  the  latest  payment  on  record  part  of  the  same  century,  when  Peter  III 

is  in  the  seventeenth  of  his  reign.     After  was  engaged  in    the    Sicilian   war,   an<» 

a  long  discontinuance,  it  was  demanded  served  as  a  pretence  for  the  pope's  sen 

In  the  fortieth  of  Edward  III.  (1366),  but  tence  of  deprivation. 


fi70  PRETENSIONS   OF   INNOCENT  IE.      Chai.  VII.  Part  I 

deemed  analogous  to  the  change  of  alodial  into  feudal,  or 
more  strictly,  to  that  of  lay  into  ecclesiastical  tenure,  which 
was  frequent  during  the  turbulence  of  the  darker  ages. 

I  have  mentioned  already  that  among  the  new  pretensions 
advanced  by  the  Roman  See  was  that  of  confirming  the  elec- 
tion of  an  emperor.  It  had  however  been  asserted  rather 
incidentally  than  in  a  peremptory  manner.  But  the  doubtful 
elections  of  Philip  and  Otho  after  the  death  of  Henry  VI. 
gave  Innocent  III.  an  opportunity  of  maintaining  more  posi- 
tively this  pretended  right.  In  a  decretal  epistle  addressed 
to  the  duke  of  Zahringen,  the  object  of  which  is  to  direct 
him  to  transfer  his  allegiance  from  Philip  to  the  other  com- 
petitor, Innocent,  after  stating  the  mode  in  which  a  regular 
election  ought  to  be  made,  declares  the  pope's  immediate 
authority  to  examine,  confirm,  anoint,  crown,  and  consecrate 
the  elect  emperor,  provided  he  shall  be  worthy ;  or  to  reject 
him  if  rendered  unfit  by  great  crimes,  such  as  sacrilege, 
heresy,  perjury,  or  persecution  of  the  church  ;  in  default  of 
election,  to  supply  the  vacancy ;  or,  in  the  event  of  equal  suf- 
frages, to  bestow  the  empire  upon  any  person  at  his  discre- 
tion.1 The  princes  of  Germany  were  not  much  influenced 
by  this  hardy  assumption,  which  manifests  the  temper  of  In- 
nocent III.  and  of  his  court,  rather  than  their  power.  But 
Otho  IV.  at  his  coronation  by  the  pope  signed  a  capitulation, 
which  cut  off  several  privileges  enjoyed  by  the  emperors, 
even  since  the  concordat  of  Calixtus,  in  respect  of  episcopal 
elections  and  investitures.2 

i  Decretal.  1.  i.  tit.  6.  c.  34,  commonly  pcrjurus,  vel  ecclesiae  persecutor.  Et 
cited  Venerabilem.  The  rubric  or  synop-  electoribus  nolentibus  eligere,  papa  sup- 
sis  of  this  epistle  asserts  the  pope's  right  plet.  Et  data  paritate,  vocuin  eligentium. 
electum  imperatorem  examinare.  appro-  nee  accedente  majore  concordia,  papa  po- 
bare  et  iuungere,  consecrare  et  coronare,  test  gratificari  cui  vult.  The  epistle  it 
si  est  dignus ;  vel  rejicere  si  est  indignus,  self  is,  if  possible,  more  strongly  express 
ut  quia  sacrilegus,  excommunicatus.  ty-  ed. 
rannus,  fatuus  et  haereticus,  paganus,  2  Schmidt,  t.  iv.  p.  149,  175. 


END    OF    THE    F£RST     VOLUME. 


DUE  DATE 

i 

UK  5tl 

1  0  2  1997 

i  ■--'■■.         /.    •  ' 

Printed 
in  USA 

9U0.1 

KLS1U 
1 


0043345131 


tji  o 

<: 


